If guilt is, as Nietzsche seems to suggest, an invention of the priests of Israel, then nothing prior to the priesthood should bear much resemblance to guilt. But if there's something like it in subhuman animals, then N's claim seems just plain fanciful. And if it has an analogue in the animal kingdom that a materialist would naturally imagine serves as the foundation for human guilt feelings, well, then N's commitment to naturalism is at odds with his genealogy of morals.
This is a nice way to try to avoid being cornered re the irreality of the self if you're a reductionist, for you can assert that a pattern obtains at the microscopic level that is not all that unlike the pattern found at the societal level. No need for the one self that does it all: instead, you have many sub-selfs that compete for dominance or take turns guiding the whole. The problem with this is, however, that the voters/officials are all zombies. None of them thinks about the whole as such. And perhaps none of them thinks even about themselves (unless one is a panzoist). None of them makes a comparison of alternatives. The more this proposed democracy seems like a zombocracy, the more consciousness will be seem to be epiphenomenal. Furthermore, if the oneness of the self is less real than the multiplicity of explanatory neural parts, then why can't each of these neural parts be conceived of as democracy as well? And why not parts of these parts, et...
Comments