In true this is a view that is generated by Fredrick Nietzsche.  He does this in an attempt to let his personal opinions and ideas rise above the normal thoughts of morally right or wrong deeds. When he says this it is all in an attempt to justify some of his ideas that he later propounds. However this paper will attempt to refute this claim in that it is the duty of each philosopher to understand the importance of observing what is morally right or wrong in their endeavours.

In the life of a philosopher there should be guiding principles. As portrayed by Aquinas it is this laws or principles that form the basis of the determination of morality. It is the rule of law which Aquinas refers to as the ‘natural law’ that defines human moral nature.  When determining morality the basic tenet of the doing of some action to the common good of all humanity should be the driving force. When Nietzsche puts across the opinion that there are altogether no moral facts and that every philosopher should have the basic quality of deciding his own fact then this is not right and falls purely under arrogance.

Aristotle on the other hand argues on the same line of morality with Aquinas but here is a difference in the way he portrays the argument. According to Aristotle, there has to be a mean between a vice. This is to say that the mean found is to be the virtue. The bottom line however is that as even Plato agrees, there has to be reason before determining the morality of an action, something that the statement out rightly denies.

Thomas Hobbes also believes that morality is based on the self interests of individuals. That for the human kind to live in harmony then there has to be morality as many would hence start living selfishly. He gives n example where there would be no unison in the way of living and that everybody would now start to live a competitive life. Thus morality is a basic tenet that must be observed in every day life (Hobbes, 1996).

To conclude, there can never be a just world without the presence of morality and thus there has to be a set guideline of moral facts. To say that there are no moral facts is in itself a way of promoting injustice. For instance, Adolf Hitler used this opinion when he massacred millions of Jews and blacks. Locke also leads us to see the essence of morality in everyday living and thus the sole reason for the appraisal of observe of moral facts by all philosophers is crucial yet also essential.

arrow_upward