I am still unsure whether I understand Nietzsche's concept of the will to power. There are so many poetic aphorisms and complex polemics sprouting from all of Nietzsche's work, it is difficult to interpret him. If there would be three men so influential to mass/modern psychology of the past 20th century who had tremendous contributions, both good and bad, they would all be Germans. Marx, Nietzsche and Freud may as well provide a general intellectual view of modernity. Nietzsche was the most agreeable from the 3, and who had the widest-ranging influence after his death. The topic of discussion would not only concern the title of this thread, but clarifying the many criticisms and interpretations of Nietzsche. Forgive me if I have totally misinterpreted Nietzsche as I will be open to blatant criticism and constructive discourse on the topics.
If our ethical behavior must transcend both slave and master morality, what method can we apply to achieving the morality of an ubermensch? In some cases, a revaluation of all values may be eventually seen as the doubting of not only popular and personal belief systems, but a skepticism of all believing and valuing. As of late, I have abandoned my belief system of truth-seeking and general criticism. Instead I find it necessary to reflect on the psychology of myself, and of mankind.
Nietzsche did not anticipate that a revaluation will result in nihilism, relativistic egotism, or devolving back to group-think. This last result is substantiated in assuming that Nietzsche's system of revaluation as a universally applicable concept. If every man, woman and child were to be so inside themselves as far as overcoming and revaluation become the only truths in life, then we will still adopt a mass psychology. Something disturbing and contradictory lies within the heart of Nietzsche's philosophy - mental degradation did not make Nietzsche stronger.
Hypothetically then, we must, heretofore, assume that adopting a mass psychology of revaluation and individualism is attainable. Furthermore, considering the other possibilities, that allowing for revaluation may lead us into such a trap of critical excursion that we have no generally applied rules (except maybe holding individual moral values so long as they do not impede on other's ability to have their own moral values in addition to persistent revaluation) that prevent a sort of impeding will or dogmatism that totalizes all morality.
If Nietzsche's system allows for both aforementioned possibilities (which would not abide by Nietzsche's philosophy) to exist necessarily, then without a will to power to transgress group mentalities, there would be a warrant for nihilism. In this case, an individual has the right to doubt all belief systems/believing because there is no universally accepted system besides having a self-mastered and isolated one (is this not contradictory) ? This is where a criticisms and misinterpretations are fervently recognized as Nietzschean. Nietzsche was never consistent in his works as to whether he wanted everyone or a few to reevaluate and was not clear about the 'ought' vs. 'is' reality to this concept. Nor was he clear on whether everyone should have that power, or does, in fact, exercise that power better than another.
It is obvious that Nietzsche believed that everyone had access to a will to power and improving it by impressing it, but this may be why Nietzsche has not contributed to the psychology of man as much as the psychology of God. Should an ubermensch not resemble the neurosis of Gilgamesh? With a will to power so idealized for strength that people feel liberated abandon themselves under his tyranny of a divine sort? Has this divine modality not evolved into self-induced submission and infatuation, a mass masochism? Nietzsche must have meant this, otherwise, if revaluation and will to power should be introspectively and universally, then we will always reconcile nihilism.
The only psychology of the modern man which I have attained from Nietzsche is our persistence in contradiction and weakness; that our natural state must be isolation and depression to such a suicidal and nihilistic depth that our complex, and necessarily deceptive, linguistic, emotional, and interactive mental structures force us to create the eternal return (in Eliade's use, not Nietzsche's) as a hidden sedative. Nietzsche's life, in stark contrast to his works, exposes the schizophrenia evident in all post-modern psychology right up until today. Of course Nietzsche has inspired greater reflection in myself, of all possible sorts, but only so I have attained the mental framework of one of Dostoevsky's characters from the 'underground'. I am pretentious and destructive who lives so inside himself that my nihilism, as with my physical presence, seems totally invisible. Savage criticism and polite discussion is welcomed.
"Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,