Throughout one’s life, one forms an opinion about the world around them through daily experiences. Such experiences also allow one to form opinions about the people around them; some of which one enjoys, while others one may despise. This distinction, coupled with one’s opinion of the world, allows for characterization into one of two groups of people: the Noble Man and the Man of Resentment. Friedrich Nietzsche, a German philosopher, outlines the relationship between such groups in On the Genealogy of Morals. In the text, Nietzsche creates a disconnect between the Noble Man and the Man of “Ressentiment,” as he calls it, through the use of figurative language and references to historical democracies. In doing so, he portrays certain aspects…show more content… Specifically, Nietzsche mostly uses figurative language when disconnecting the Noble Man from the Man of Ressentiment. For example, Nietzsche personifies “ressentiment” when saying it “consummates and exhausts itself in an immediate reaction, and therefore does not poison” (39), while talking about the Noble Man. Giving such actions as “consummates” and ‘exhausts” to ressentiment, actions that are fairly permanent and immediate, imply that it is not critically present in the Noble Man. The comparison to the man of ressentiment is seen through the personified word “poison,” for such a word holds a strong negative connotation which implies that ressentiment becomes so prevalent in that man’s nature, that it consumes them and defines their lifestyle. Such personification implies that Nietzsche merits the Noble Man over the Man of Ressentiment. Nietzsche continues this language as he continues to state that “lambs dislike great birds of prey does not seem strange” (44). Here, the Noble Man is assigned the role of a “great bird of prey,” while the Man of Ressentiment is seen as a “lamb.” Such an analogy describes the envy the weak feel for the strong, but also feel for themselves. This hatred embodies the weak, hurtling them