File spoon-archives/nietzsche.archive/nietzsche_1995/nietzsche_Apr.95, message 44


Subject: re: more e.r.
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 95 16:04:13 MDT
From: "Nathan Bauer" <njbauer-AT-acs.ucalgary.ca>


To David Jacobs (et al),

I have to take issue with your claim that "most of Nietzsche's
work goes against the idea of making other humans into better
creatures".  Even when he rejects the idea of pity, as
Zarathustra does at the end of his tale, he rejects it because of
its harmful consequences for humanity.  The same is true of his
attack on Christian metaphysics and morality (which reminds
me--happy Easter to everyone).  In fact, why would Nietzsche have
written at all if he was not interested in the welfare of others?

Regarding the passage from the Gay Science that you cited (#341),
I believe that this is an excellent example of a psychological
version of eternal return.  Nietzsche asks:  suppose a demon
appeared to you in your "loneliest loneliness" and told you of
the e.r. of the same, how would you react?  Nietzsche is not
presenting a proof of the doctrine, but merely the psychological
consequences of the thought.  He continues:
"If this thought were to gain possession of you, it would change
you, as you are, or perhaps crush you.  The question in each and
every thing, 'Do you want this once more and innumerable times
more?' would weigh upon your actions as the greatest stress.  Or
how well disposed would you have to become to yourself and to
life to crave nothing more fervently than this ultimate eternal
confirmation and seal?"

Clearly, this passage refers to a psychological rather than
physical version of e.r.  I believe that this is true of most of
his published references to the theory.  I also believe that
the general absence of physical versions of e.r. in his published
works is deliberate and significant (though here I feel more
uncertain of myself).

Having said this, you may be quite right that Nietzsche also used
e.r. to "attack the conceptual and moral framework that dominates
our thinking and living".  I would add, however, that it seems
unlikely that this was the most significant aspect of e.r., for
it fails to explain the shocking impact the thought of e.r. had
on Nietzsche.  (He related this experience in a letter, but I've
lost the source.  The section on T.S.Z. in ECCE HOMO also
captures some of the intensity of his revelation.)
Still, I would certainly be interested in hearing more of your
thoughts on the subject.

Bye for now,
     Nathan Bauer (njbauer-AT-acs.ucalgary.ca)











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

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

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005