nto others so they will do unto you," he would see this as more consistent with human nature. He, like Firestone, saw sexual love clearly as a lust for possession, though he did not see it from a feminist point of view. Kant has no concern for human nature – being selfish by nature does not assuage our moral duties.
             Nietzsche had little reverence for the utilitarian ideals of Mill either. The concept – maximize pleasure and minimize pain – is simplistic by Nietzsche's standards. He aptly points out that sometimes the maximum displeasure is necessary to achieve "the growth of an abundance of subtle pleasures and joys that have rarely been relished yet." Minimizing displeasure eliminates the "capacity for joy." The virtues of Mill's morality are aimed at the maximum good for the many; acts are judged based on their consequences to society. However Nietzsche felt that while these virtues may be for the good of society as a whole, they could be harmful to those who possess them. He calls them "victims of virtue." Man can be so focused on virtues that "he resists the effort of reason to keep them in balance with their other instincts." These virtues can not come from an individual's reason because they "lead the individual to allow himself to be transformed into a mere function of the whole."
             Christian morality may be the most disturbing of all to Nietzsche. In fact, he has a cynical view of monotheism as a whole; it is the rigid consequence of the doctrine alleging one normal human type. Prayer is for those with no thoughts of their own and those, who on their own, can know no elevation of the soul. He scoffs at the idea of the Christian God as an object of love; if God were to be an object of love he should give up judging and justice. God is proud and vindictive, his love is not unconditional but instead depends on if's. The C...