Date: Sun, 19 Feb 95 2:09 GMT
From: WIDDER-AT-VAX.LSE.AC.UK
Subject: Re: Eternal Return is not eternal rerun.


Austin,

Why the problem with Nietzsche's notes?  What does it mean to say "ideas which
he wrote in his notes later changed, sometimes drasitcally, when they finally
made it into published works"?  First of all, Nietzsche's -- and everyone
else's for that matter -- ideas changed, often drastically, between published
works.  I don't know a philosopher whose published works, like his/her notes
are not "reflective of a developmental process" that "cannot be taken as
his final word on any matter."  And as for what Nietzsche thought was 
important, what does that mean or even matter?  It is Nietzsche himself who
claimed that we are unknown to ourselves.  Finally, if Nietzsche's notes are
not "so wonderful", then we shouldn't bother with his private correspondence
either.  They certainly don't embody refined ideas that find their way into
his 'published' works.

A number of important concepts, to the extent that they are developed in 
Nietzsche's writings, published or unpublished, are to be found in the notes.
Ideas such as the play of forces, power and resistence engendering one 
another, etc.  The reason I mentioned Will to Power in the last post was
because it's important to recognize that the eternal return is not a complete
doctrine in Nietzsche's works, and certainly not in his published works.

As for the book titled THE ETERNAL RETURN, this is in the translators' note
to Note 1057.  It mentions 1911, p. 514 (I assume this is a secondary source
from 1911, or perhaps an early compilation of the notes), which says this
section "represents the plan for a book, THE ETERNAL RECURRENCE."

Nathan
widder-AT-vax.lse.ac.uk


	--- from list nietzsche-AT-jefferson.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------