Morality, the theme at the center of attention, is the backbone of the first aphorism of the section “Those who “improve” humanity”, in Friedrich Nietzsche's book, “The Twilight of the Idols ”. To also try to explain what it is about, the text will be divided into five parts. The first section extends from line 1 to line 4, the second; lines 4-7, the third; lines 7-11, the fourth; lines 11-12 and finally the fifth proceeds to line 17. The first section embraces Nietzsche's estimate of the qualities and value of philosophers. He believes that they "stand beyond good and evil," concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior; this is morality. The reason for this, according to him, is that philosophers are able to make thoughtful decisions, which he classifies as an “illusion”. Nietzsche then explains the etiology of his statement; arises from his intuition that “there are no moral facts.” In the second section he provides readers with a comparative exposition, in which he highlights the similarity between moral and religious judgments. Both, he claims, rely on imaginary “realities”. For Nietzsche, morality is not absolute. For him, morality is an "interpretation" or rather a "misinterpretation" of phenomena, which are perceptions that the senses or the mind notice. Once again, in his writings lies an analogy between moral and religious judgments. In the third section of my division of the aphorism, Nietzsche completes his belief by comparing moral judgments with religious ones. A lack of awareness converges them. They share the state of negligence towards exactness, actuality and accuracy, which he refers to as “the distinction between real and imaginary…half the paper…by Nietzsche's standards is unknown. It therefore seems that Nietzsche did not provide his reader with sufficient tools to adequately digest his work. At this point there is an excess of questions. From the above, does it perhaps follow that Nietzsche's aphorism “Those who “improve” Humanity” is also a sign language? Is it just a symptom? Could it be taken literally? Or does it contain “nothing but nonsense”? It also follows that if it contains “nothing but nonsense,” it can be taken literally. However, if taken literally, it means that there are followers of Nietzsche for whom he is a leader, that is, an idol. Implementing the precedent would break Nietzsche's theory of the decline of idols, suggested by the book's title. His words follow a pattern of "circular" logic. It therefore evokes an apparent complication.