All chapters

Beyond Good and Evil · Chapter

Chapter 33 explained

The narrator issues a merciless critique of self-renunciation morality and the aesthetics of disinterested contemplation, arguing they must be called to account as potential deceptions that please the beneficiary and observer, demanding cau

What happens

The narrator issues a merciless critique of self-renunciation morality and the aesthetics of disinterested contemplation, arguing they must be called to account as potential deceptions that please the beneficiary and observer, demanding caution.

Themes in this chapter

  • Critique of Modernity

    Targets modern moral sentiments of self-sacrifice and 'disinterested' art as suspect constructs needing interrogation.

  • Psychology as the Fundamental Science

    Applies psychological suspicion to moral feelings, questioning whether pleasing sentiments like altruism are deceptions.

Characters to notice

  • The Narrator

    Directly critiques morality of surrender and self-sacrifice, advocating for distrust and caution against their pleasing effects.

Key passages

  • the sentiment of surrender, of sacrifice for one’s neighbour, and all self-renunciation-morality, must be mercilessly called to account, and brought to judgment

    Altruistic and self-denying moralities must be rigorously interrogated and judged.

    Declares a harsh philosophical audit of conventional morality.

  • the aesthetics of “disinterested contemplation,” under which the emasculation of art nowadays seeks insidiously enough to create itself a good conscience.

    The idea of art for art's sake is a sneaky attempt to justify the weakening of art.

    Connects moral critique to aesthetic theory, seeing both as forms of life-denial.

  • That they please —him who has them, and him who enjoys their fruit, and also the mere spectator—that is still no argument in their favour, but just calls for caution.

    The fact that these sentiments please everyone involved is not proof of their value, but a reason to be suspicious.

    Applies a utilitarian counter-argument to undermine the value of pleasing moral sentiments.