Nietzsche, pt. II

Upon reading the Nietzsche essay we were assigned, I found it difficult to understand at first due to the sentence structure. Fortunately, I came across a bit in the second section that was much easier to understand and found very interesting at the same time. He talks about the origin of "good" action and what other philosophers think. In a nut shell, these philosophers believe that peoples unegoitistic actions, that is actions that benefit only the receiver, where praised by those who gain from said action. Thus, through time, the origin of this praise was lost to time and that these actions were inherently good. Nietzsche on the other hand, states that the original "good people" were actually the more privileged and powerful. He calls this distance between poor and rich a pathos of distance. The area between the ones who set what is "right" of "good" and the ones who cannot have such influence. I personally find both presentations interesting and plausible at the same time. I do not, however, favor one over the other as of yet. Further reading and understanding of his works may help me to do so.