Date: Sun, 19 Feb 1995 09:51:50 -0600 (CST)
From: "Don A. Ringelestein" <dringel-AT-orion.it.luc.edu>
Subject: Re: Eternal Return is not eternal rerun.


On Sat, 18 Feb 1995 WIDDER-AT-vax.lse.ac.uk wrote:

> Don asks, "Do we really want to suggest that N. never saw fit to publish what
> he actually thought about the eternal recurrence?"  Well, yes, we do want to
> say that, in a way.  The biographical 'facts' are well known:  Zarathustra was
> never finished -- there were two more parts that Nietzsche never had a chance
> to write.  Further, all that exists are outlines for the book Nietzsche was
> intending to write before his insanity, which was to be titled THE ETERNAL
> RETURN (Well, the title would have been in German, of course).  See, for
> example, note 1057 in THE WILL TO POWER (and yes, it is a text WORTH reading,
> for points like this one, if nothing else), for what is believed to have been
> an outline for that book.
> 
> Nathan
> widder-AT-vax.lse.ac.uk
> 
> 
> 	--- from list nietzsche-AT-jefferson.village.virginia.edu ---
> 
Nathan,
	I'll grant you that there were some notes that N. might have used 
in his palnned work _The Eternal Return_, but it is also the case that N. 
gave up this project in the fall of 1888, if I remember correctly.  
Furthermore, what are these other two sections of _Zarathustra_ that you 
refer to?  I have never heard of these before.  I realize that part four 
was never published during N.'s life; Elizibeth even blocked its 
publication in the 1890's.  Please enlighten me conerning these 'other' 
two sections.  I also suggest that anyone who is interested in the status 
of the _Nachlass_ refer to Bernd Magnus' "On the Uses and Disadvantages 
of the _Will to Power_ for his excellent discussion of these topics.

Best,

Don



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

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