A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RUPTURES AND CONTINUITIES IN THE CONCEPTION OF JUSTICE IN ALL TOO HUMAN AND GENEALOGY OF MORALS

Abstract

The present study aims to investigate the ruptures and continuities in the Nietzschean conception of justice based on two works, namely: Human All Too Human and Genealogy of Morals. By ruptures, we mean the dissonant aspects between the two works, and by continuities, the consonant or convergent aspects. The aim of the research undertaken is to verify whether it is possible to apprehend a normative character and not only a merely descriptive character of the notion of justice in Nietzsche. This research is justified by the fact that the connections between Nietzsche, justice, law, and normativity can no longer be seen as a surprising fact for researchers. The themes that gravitate around this discussion are abundant, as is the case of penal abolitionism, democracy, and inequality among men, among others. The method used in this work is precisely the literature review method, because with it will be possible to carry out a detailed comparative study in order to qualitatively approach Nietzsche's argumentation on justice in different periods of his bibliographical production. Thus, we conclude that there are extremely convergent points between the works Human All Too Human and Genealogy of Morals, such as, for example, the balance of power and the conflict of interests. However, there are also points in opposition, such as normativity and the Law as the center of gravity of justice between creditor and debtor in the Genealogy of Morals, a situation inexistent in the human instincts of self-preservation explored in Human All Too Human.