All chapters

Beyond Good and Evil · Chapter

The Olympian Vice explained

The chapter argues against the English philosopher Hobbes's condemnation of laughter, proposing instead that the capacity for laughter, especially a superior, 'golden' laughter, is a virtue.

What happens

The chapter argues against the English philosopher Hobbes's condemnation of laughter, proposing instead that the capacity for laughter, especially a superior, 'golden' laughter, is a virtue. It playfully suggests that gods, if they philosophize, would laugh in an 'overman-like' way, even at sacred matters, revealing a divine perspective that mocks all seriousness.

Themes in this chapter

  • Nobility and Order of Rank

    Implied through the ranking of philosophers 'according to the quality of their laughing,' with 'golden laughter' and divine 'overman-like' laughter representing a higher order.

  • Critique of Modernity

    Critique of a modern, overly serious, and life-denying philosophical stance (exemplified by Hobbes) that seeks to overcome natural human expressions like laughter.

Characters to notice

  • The Englishman

    Referenced via the philosopher Hobbes, who is cited as trying to bring laughter into 'bad repute' by calling it a 'bad infirmity of human nature' that thinking minds should overcome.

  • Gods

    Speculated to philosophize and laugh in an 'overman-like and new fashion,' finding amusement even in holy matters, which suggests a perspective beyond human moral seriousness.

  • The Narrator

    Directly counters Hobbes, ranks philosophers by their laughter, and expresses personal belief about the gods' philosophical and mocking nature.

Key passages

  • “Laughing is a bad infirmity of human nature, which every thinking mind will strive to overcome” (Hobbes)

    Hobbes believed laughter was a harmful weakness that all rational people should try to eliminate.

    This is the view the narrator directly opposes, using it as a springboard for his own valuation of laughter.

  • I would even allow myself to rank philosophers according to the quality of their laughing⁠—up to those who are capable of golden laughter.

    I propose evaluating philosophers based on how well they laugh, with the highest rank going to those with a 'golden' laughter.

    Establishes laughter as a criterion for philosophical and personal superiority.

  • Gods are fond of ridicule: it seems that they cannot refrain from laughter even in holy matters.

    The gods love to mock; it appears they are compelled to laugh even at things considered sacred.

    Posits a divine perspective that transcends and mocks human conceptions of seriousness and sanctity.