Critical analysis of Nietzsche's statement: actions done out of love are always beyond good and evil Friedrich Nietzsche is one renowned German philosophers, cultural critics and essayists. Nietzsche's works on aesthetics, realization, truth, cultural theory, the meaning of existence, language, decency, history, power and nihilism have had a vast impact on the way of Western life as well as intellectual narrative. This author once claimed that "actions done out of love are always beyond good and evil" and most of his readers realized that there were several flaws in this statement. Therefore, this analytical article will evaluate Nietzsche's claim in accordance with his broad-spectrum teachings in some of his documents. Analyzing Nietzsche's statement that "what is done out of love is beyond good and evil", one must be able to describe what good and evil are. An action is said to be “good” when it offers the person performing it or the person concerned a rewarding result. On the other hand, a wrong action leads to a less than beneficial result. In other words, an evil act is the antipode of a good act (Degünther 2014). Furthermore, it must be understood that an act is neither bad nor good in itself, but to a certain extent it is the end that describes its place in the realm of evil and good. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay In one of his books “Beyond Good and Evil,” Nietzsche accuses previous theorists of lacking decisive sagacity and blindly conforming to doctrinaire premises in their contemplation of morality. In particular, he accuses them of throwing ostentatious metaphysical schemes on the belief that man considered moral is the opposite of that considered wicked, instead of simply a different expression of similar crucial inclinations which find more unshakable expression in the evil person (Nietzsche 2017). ). Goodness and wickedness as applied by this author refer to the contradictory polar principles of Christian ethics. Therefore, they are not automatically the same as we understand these expressions. Friedrich himself understood that the Christian ethical scheme was synthetic and had been imposed on earth which, before its beginning, had analyzed things to a more elementary degree of bad or good, which, vulgarly, can be understood as " what is favorable to the riches of man's life” and “what is not” (Owen 2014). Therefore, when Nietzsche states that “actions done out of love are always beyond good and evil,” he is implying that love occurs naturally, that it is an inherent and instinctive incident. This virtue is devoid of ethical substance, and if it were to have one, it would certainly fail to understand the Christian principles which consider love as a probity of compassion and pity. Nietzsche sees sympathy as a rejection of people's lives, because, again, frankly, if people sympathize with bad people, then they have no incentive to emerge strong, and they allow themselves to be enveloped by a Christian ethical structure that elevates the pathos and thus recovers the strong. This statement therefore shows that love lacks ethical content. Nietzsche means that it is ordered and superior to everything else and therefore should not be thought of as an ethical structure, but rather as an elementary sensation of life. Furthermore, it should be noted that Nietzsche's assertion is astimulating concept. The question we should ask ourselves is: what did the novelist mean by good, evil and love? When it comes to love, Friedrich seems to touch all areas. He says that there is a certain madness in love but that there is always a reason for this madness. Then another time he emphasizes that love is understanding and rejoicing in the fact that a counterpart or another person acts, experiences, and lives differently from us. Additionally, this author doesn't have much positive to articulate about female or bodily affection, which led me to assume that the type of "love" he was thinking of when he asserted that "the actions were done out of love is always beyond good and evil” may have had nothing to do with the thirst for sexual activity, but maybe not. This line of thinking makes the subject multifaceted, as sex can certainly be an act done out of love. As a result, perhaps even for him, female affection and love as a display of love are probabilities, at least in speculation, if not in reality. Regarding iniquity and good, I suppose that, as for Nietzsche, evil can be anything that “denies life” and good is anything that “affirms life.” Thus, it can be argued that all kinds of lexicons of love, so to speak, are on the table, as women and sexual acts can be seen in the light affirmation of life alongside several other categories of affirmation. So, if anything "done in love" goes before both life denial and affirmation, then love can be seen as a power that is magnificent for life itself or beyond and his power, therefore, does not belong to this. world. Obviously, what Nietzsche may have been implying is that acts of love move people away from the confines of the principles of this human race. This could get complicated, because it means there could be no regulation on love and also no system of impartiality through which we can judge its actions. The insinuation is that even an offense committed in the name of love could be tolerated and the executor would not be judged according to the law, whether divine or human. This is something we should all think about. Furthermore, Nietzsche's assertion that "actions done out of love are always beyond good and evil" seems to describe a shift in reference point toward "evil and good" from an objective to reach, or a line to walk, towards a way of living, a system of living towards others that goes beyond simple ethical binaries. The virtue of love is not simply living in favor of what is considered good and away from what is considered evil. It is not about meeting certain predetermined standards, but rather, to paraphrase (Smoley 2008), about the superfluity of life for survival. This carries over, in some way, to Bankowski's (2013) examination of the link between love and law, where he sees love as an achievement of the rule - but it implies a new correlation with law. “law” of “evil and good”. a shift from simple conformity to overcoming and past, to evaluating life based on dispositions other than simply “good and evil.” Love ceases to illustrate the other in the demands of evil or good and therefore also revolutionizes our affiliation with ourselves in the same way. When someone loves, their actions are not simply an external evil or good, but rather something more, which fulfills and exceeds and cannot be reduced to the simple binary beginnings of conformist (slave) principles. Perhaps an alternative approach to analysis is to compare it to the perception gap »..