“The democratic movement,” he complains, “is the heir of the Christian movement.” Yet, Nietzsche is no less emphatic that the scholars are themselves a “more refined effect of the democratic order.” The scholars pride themselves on their skepticism, atheism, and supposed objectivity but they are-at bottom-only the latest manifestation of the will to truth that characterized the Platonic and Christian era. Nietzsche implies that there is a kinship between the Christians, the democrats, and the scholars. The Democratic Mediocrity of the Scholars The scholars are fundamentally democratic people who pander to bourgeois society, whereas the philosophers of the future will be aristocrats who demonstrate humanity’s capacity for creative excellence. The heart of the conflict between the scholars and the philosophers of the future is political. For humanity to be saved from the nihilism of the scholars, a new class of “philosophers of the future” must arise and displace them. The scholars, devoted to the pursuit of objective truth under the scientific method, deny that the creation of values is even possible. Nietzsche suggests that this scholarly desire for objectivity imperils real philosophy, which should seek above all to create new value systems.

Rather, the scholars include those in every department of academia who seek to impose the assiduous, calculating, and “objective” spirit of science on every aspect of human life.

The scholars are not limited to a single academic field, such as mathematics or the natural sciences. In Beyond Good and Evil, Nietzsche argues that the enthronement of science has created a new class of elites known as the scholars. While Nietzsche’s attacks on Christianity and classical moral virtue have heretofore received great attention, his equally critical attitude towards the dogmatism of modern science has often been neglected. Yet, for all of the tangible benefits that scientific progress has produced, some astute commentators noted that the new authority of science poses urgent challenges for both philosophy and human excellence.Īmong the critics of the Enlightenment faith in science, Friedrich Nietzsche stands out as among the most profound. Today, scientific advances such as modern medicine have improved the quality of life for millions of people, seemingly vindicating the early modern apostles of science. René Descartes praised science for preparing man to become a “master and possessor of nature,” and, in the same vein, Francis Bacon rejoiced that science offered hope for “the relief of man’s estate.” Deploring the otherworldly character of the Christian social order, Bacon, Descartes, and other devotees of the Enlightenment believed that science offered moderns the chance to build a more comfortable, secure society. Since the Enlightenment, it has been a cliché to portray science as an unquestionable good, and perhaps even as the panacea to all human problems.

Beyond good and evil philosophy