Introduction
Language is an inherent and intuitive tool of human brain that impacts not only the roadmap of individuals but also their lives. There is no element of life which is not touched by the influence of language. Though the amount and intensity of impact may differ, there is always a thick or thin layer of linguistic repercussion on the life of the people. So, imagining a life without language and society is nearly impossible. But these impacts have varying significance and influence in multiple ways in various walks of human life.
In order to provide a deeper, intuitive, and pragmatic analysis, many philosophers and social reformers have presentenced their views with sound justifications and systematic interpretations. Some of these views give birth to look at the problems of life from different perspectives. And, this becomes more complex if any philosophy or perception challenges the existing rule of law. It is true that human minds are very comfortable accepting the traditional methods and approaches of life. This traditionalistic approach creates a pre-defined conceptions in our minds to make us believe as to what is right or wrong. The definition of correctness or incorrectness is based on accepting the traditional principles of life. Any deviation from it is termed to be in violation of the rule of law.
Here, the moot question is who is to define the appropriateness or inappropriateness of the situation. In this context, what is appropriate and acceptable to one person or principle may be unacceptable and inappropriate to another person or principle. And, the principles and tools for defining these parameters are arbitrary and unorganized. In the light of these bitter facts of interpretation and analysis methods, there are two leading and internationally-reputed philosophers who presented their view in a typical and an untraditional manner.
These two philosophers tried to challenge those philosophies, principles, views, conceptions and perception that had remained unchallenged and un-surmountable for centuries. So, doing or thinking of different things is like inviting a risk of criticism and slander. It is not an easy task for anyone to deviate from the path or principle which had been treated as sacred and unchangeable. But, these two philosophers – Karl Marx and Friedrich Nietzsche – gave a different perspective on the impact of language on the life of people and showed the courage and grit to think out of the box.
Fundamental of analysis
Both philosophers raised doubts over the respect shown towards the life, society and people. Their views were firm and unapologetic that all human beings are equal in this universe. No one can or should deny this fact. Any discrimination made on the basis of colour, creed, religion and region is unjustifiable and unreasonable. Further, they stressed the need that leading a quality life with dignity is the right and privilege of all human beings. When they used the terms “quality” of life, they meant it in a broader sense. Based on their principles and philosophies, some of the elements that envisage quality of life, are:
a. Equality of status
b. Freedom of expression
c. Social justice
d. Food, shelter and clothes for all
e. Equal opportunity
In their views, when one attains the aforesaid rights, the real, just and true social structure is established where there is a sense of universal togetherness and cohesion among these people. And, the world is free from injustice, crime, discrimination and exploitation. So, they are of the firm opinions that any evil or crime in life is the product of social injustice. And, it is illogical to blame the virtues or qualities of people or brand them as persons with sin and criminal temperament. Further, they believe that hungry minds cannot think of any noble ideas or view. Everything falls in the right place only when there is absence of hunger and scarcity. It is paramount to remember that scarcity breeds mental degradation. And, this ultimately leads to crime, injustice, exploitation and discrimination. These are the common elements of justice, equality and freedom for which both philosophers endlessly fought against the traditional approach and principles of life.
Comparative analysis between Karl Marx and Friedrich Nietzsche
In order to understand and assimilate these facts, it is necessary to go into the comparative analysis of their approaches. To deals with the comparative and contrastive analysis between Karl Marx and Friedrich Nietzsche, here is a table that describes and explains the facts in a rational and effective manner.
Karl Marx
Fredrick Nietzsche
a. Socio- economic facts are the roots of all human thought and behaviour.
a. Psychological and temperamental facts are the roots of all human action and reaction.
b. Displayed some respect to the existing laws of life, fundamental belief and principles.
b. Showed no respect to the existing laws of life, fundamental belief and principles.
c. Did not attack the fundamental principle so harshly.
c. Attacked the biased fundamental principle and used various means to
attack even the fundamental roots.
d. Showed economic relation for determining the past, present and future of the society.
d. Showed social and psychological relation for the past, present and future of the society.
e. He used terms like equality, productivity, feudalism, productivity, industrialisation, labour and discrimination to explain his points of views.
e. He used terms like crime, immorality and religious dogma to justify his logic and interpretation.
f. Not biased against any region.
f. Anti-American Philosophy.
g. He is termed like a revolutionist and fighter for the equality, justice and freedom of the downtrodden.
g. He is viewed like an eccentric and strange person by their contemporaries.
h. A holistic and pragmatic social thinker
h. A thinker that defined and distinguished between the morality of the master and the slave.
Conclusion
Taking into account the aforesaid facts, contrastiveness and realities of both the philosophers - Karl Marx and Friedrich Nietzsche, one has every reason to draw a conclusion that equality, social justice, freedom and equal opportunity to sustain life, are the hallmark of rendering a quality life to the people. In their absence, it is not possible to build a society that cares for humanity and social transformation. Although, the principles, approaches and perceptions differ in some ways, the bottom line of their fights is to improve the quality life of people by bringing about the economic, temperamental and social changes. I am sure that there is a lot to learn for us from the philosophies of these philosophers. And, there is a need to take some positive points from their thoughts and perceptions, apply them in the present social structure to remove unjust, biased and crime-prone society, and finally build a system of equality and freedom so that all of us lead a happy, healthy and prosperous life in this world.
