Criticism of Western moral metaphysics in Nietzsche and Wittgenstein's early thought

In this study, we have tried to explain why Nietzsche and Wittgenstein, who make common criticisms of Western moral metaphysics, diverge in terms of their conclusions. Nietzsche and Wittgenstein showed that all conceptions of morality are unprovable, metaphysical human interpretations with their views that nature has no moral structure, that human beings have no esence that imposes moral responsibility (Nietzsche), or that although human beings have a moral essence, this esence cannot be objectively known (Wittgenstein), and that there is no universal moral ideal. Nietzsche, however, as a moralist, either ignored the fact that he himself made a moral, metaphysica linterpretation by replacing every moral value he displaced by these criticisms with his own opposing values, or considered himself an exception to his own criticisms. In this context, the status of Nietzsche's understanding of morality in the face of his criticisms is discussed. Throughout this period, it has been shown that the reason why Nietzsche'sthought has been subject to different interpretations is his adherence to moral discourse. In particular, Nietzsche's concepts of eternal recurrence, will to power and superhuman are discussed through the functions they assume in his understanding of morality, and an attempt is made to find a compromise to the opposing interpretations of these concepts. Based on similar criticisms as Nietzsche, Wittgenstein primarily focused on objective knowledge in order to show that no moral judgment can be objective. He declared that morality is metaphysical with an understanding of objectivity based on language-world correspondence. For Wittgenstein, although moral judgments are not objective, they use an objective language when they are expressed. Wittgenstein stated that one should keep silent when it comes to moral judgments that, despite all their claims of objectivity, are no more than unprovable interpretations. In this context, by claiming that Wittgenstein's call for silence is a moral call, it is tried to show that he emphasizes action when it comes to morality. At the same time, it has been tried to show the similarity between Wittgenstein's life and his thoughts by claiming that the fact that Wittgenstein did not make any moral statements in his personal life, which he devoted to finding the meaning and purpose of life, was due to these views on morality. Finally, it is tried to show that Nietzsche did metaphysics by adhering to moral discourse, while Wittgenstein had to keep silent in order not to fall into this mistake.