Always attack
How would Nietzsche make sense of the Bible teaching, “turn the other cheek”?
The idea that you should “turn the other cheek” when dealing with difficult people is probably on the top 5 of most people’s lists of impractical teachings from the Bible.
The actual quote from the Book of Matthew (5:39, New International Version), which comes straight from the mouth of Jesus is, ”But I tell you, do not resist an evil person! If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.”
So if a malicious person demands things of you—or wants to do awful things to you—you’re instructed to let them have what they want, even if this means allowing your life to be turned completely upside down.
This certainly sounds like impractical advice. It also sounds like the opposite of any counsel that Nietzsche would give, considering the value he placed on strength and the pursuit of power.
1. Nietzsche’s opinion of Jesus’ instruction to “turn the other cheek”
I was surprised to find that Nietzsche’s reflections on this teaching are moderately sympathetic (and they come from The Will to Power, of all books; check out passage 163, which I’ve also discussed in the section titled Nietzsche’s Thoughts on Jesus that appears near the end of this post).
Nietzsche actually views this teaching as one of the more admirable (i.e. not-resentful) features of Jesus’ guide to living.
From a Nietzschean perspective, “turning the other cheek” could translate as something like this. Don’t get bogged down in defending yourself against what bad-minded people are trying to do to you. You will come into your own power, with fewer detours, if you resist the urge to react and continue on with what you instinctively know you must do.
But this is my elaboration. What Nietzsche actually writes is “Bliss is not something promised; it is there if you live and act in such and such a way.” He just tries to restate what he believes the message of the teaching is, without trying to synthesize it with his philosophy, as I have tried to do (and very clumsily too).
Here’s another way to think about this teaching which takes my clumsy attempt at reading Nietzsche’s will to power into Matthew 5:39, a few steps further.
2. Vulnerability and aggression are two sides of the same coin
When you “turn the other cheek” you are making yourself vulnerable. But vulnerability is not the same thing as passivity. You’re not retreating from all forms of conflict. You’re being more mindful and selective about what you’re going to fight for, and how you’re going to fight.
It’s also worth noting that there are methods of combat which understand aggression and vulnerability as two sides of the same coin.
One example that comes to mind for me are the Nordic berserkers who were famous for fighting naked, and for using their nudity to intimidate their opponents.
When you fight naked you are signaling; 1) that you are prepared to die, and 2) you are prioritizing methods of attack over methods of defense. You don’t want to be encumbered by body armor, a shield, a helmet or anything else that will impede your ability to do lethal damage to your opponent.
Early Christians figured out how to do the same thing, but without weapons. They weren’t aiming for a military victory. They had even more ambitious goals, to transform hearts and minds.
I think they understood that if you react to what other people are trying to do to you, you cede your power to them. Even if you manage to successfully defend yourself, you have begun to operate within their definition of the situation … you start living inside of the story they have about you.
Plus, if you’re reacting to people, who are themselves, highly reactive (i.e. people who need to have an enemy to rail against in order to think clearly), you will probably end up doing things that will trigger their defenses…because you’ve allowed yourself to become the demon they need you to be, so they can continue to feed their egos about their own righteousness.
And all of this reactivity and defensiveness distracts from the fight you’re trying to bring to them—which is to get them to reflect on the wisdom of their own choices, in light of the moral questions you are putting to them (which they try to evade at every opportunity).
3. Applications for us today
These insights have practical application, even for people who are not trying to change the world.
I think most of us will have a better quality of life if we can improve our ability to avoid egoistic conflicts. But avoiding dead-end conflicts is only half the challenge.
If avoidance becomes your number one goal, you are heading down a path that leads to nihilistic passivity.
It’s also important to know how to fight well. You can’t learn to do this if you’ve become habituated to thinking that all of your aggressive impulses are bad.
Taking the risks that are necessary to build bridges between people, initiating new projects, innovating new and better solutions for problems that really matter to people … all of these feats are made possible by disciplined and highly-refined aggressive impulses (which, as Nietzsche might have argued, are all iterations of the will to power).
When it is refined in this way, aggression becomes a life-affirming force which is all about creating not controlling.
When you read the teaching to “turn the other cheek” in this light, it translates into this very simple piece of advice.
Don’t defend. Always attack.
Other Posts
Prometheus revisited - by Philip Kretsedemas
The Curse of a Dying God - by Philip Kretsedemas
God is dead ... a sociological perspective
Love = accepting death gracefully - by Philip Kretsedemas