Self-preservation (n.) is a symptom of weakness and decline.
Self-preservation (n.) is more of an assumption than a fact. It does occur, but only as an exception. The general condition of life is not one of want or famine, but rather one of riches, of lavish luxuriance, and even of absurd prodigality. Where there is a struggle, it is a struggle for power.
Self-preservation (n.) is only one of the indirect results of man's will to power; his will to discharge his strength
Self-preservation (n.) sets the limit of our knowledge: it is unlikely that our "knowledge" extends farther than is exactly necessary for it.
Self-preservation (n.) demands, by its most profound laws, that every man find his own virtue, his own categorical imperative.
Self-preservation (n.) in its judicious form is the basis of justice.
Self-preservation (n.) is not the cardinal drive: a living thing wants above all to discharge its force, and preservation is only a consequence.
Self-preservation (n.) as Spinoza's law ought to put a stop to all change — but it is false: every living thing does everything it can not to preserve itself but to become more.
Self-preservation (n.) cannot explain protoplasm: it takes in absurdly more than it needs and does not preserve itself but disintegrates — hunger is already a late, specialised interpretation.
Self-preservation (n.) as Spinoza's principle ought to stop all change — but it is false: everything living does all it can not to preserve itself but to become more.