Moralities are a Sign-Language of the Affects

B Leiter - Social Philosophy and Policy, 2013 - cambridge.org
Social Philosophy and Policy, 2013cambridge.org
This essay offers an interpretation and partial defense of Nietzsche's idea that moralities and
moral judgments are “sign-languages” or “symptoms” of our affects, that is, of our emotions
or feelings. According to Nietzsche, as I reconstruct his view, moral judgments result from the
interaction of two kinds of affective responses: first, a “basic affect” of inclination toward or
aversion from certain acts, and then a further affective response (the “meta-affect”) to that
basic affect (that is, sometimes we can be either inclined towards or averted from our basic …
This essay offers an interpretation and partial defense of Nietzsche's idea that moralities and moral judgments are “sign-languages” or “symptoms” of our affects, that is, of our emotions or feelings. According to Nietzsche, as I reconstruct his view, moral judgments result from the interaction of two kinds of affective responses: first, a “basic affect” of inclination toward or aversion from certain acts, and then a further affective response (the “meta-affect”) to that basic affect (that is, sometimes we can be either inclined towards or averted from our basic affects). I argue that Nietzsche views basic affects as noncognitive, that is, as identifiable solely by how they feel to the subject who experiences the affect. By contrast, I suggest that meta-affects (I focus on guilt and shame) sometimes incorporate a cognitive component like belief. After showing how this account of moral judgment comports with a reading of Nietzsche's moral philosophy that I have offered in previous work, I conclude by adducing philosophical and empirical psychological reasons for thinking that Nietzsche's account of moral judgment is correct.
Cambridge University Press