File spoon-archives/nietzsche.archive/nietzsche_2000/nietzsche.0006, message 30

Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 14:24:15 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Nietzsche is Bunk

N's truth in the eternal return lies not in the actual
words that he writes, but in the meaning behind them.
Consider this:
what would be the difference between living the same
life over and over again for eternity, or, living your
life one time, and every moment, once passed is gone
By creating the metephore of the eternal return, N's
focuses us on not living the same life repeatedly, but
the value of the transitory nature of our being....
live your life as if you must live it for eternity
because you only live it once.

--- "Chand B. Rangwani" <>
> Nz's eternal recurrence is bunk. That's when I gave
> up on him as a means
> of affording an adeqaute life.
> All has not been - ask any natural historian and he
> will tell you that
> the chances that man (forget Shakespeare!) could be
> created anew are
> very slim. If anything has to repeat itself, it
> would be in another
> universe, where time too shall start anew.
> The biggest contradiction in Nz is his emphasis of
> the life in the here
> and now and his holding firm to a near-supernatural
> assumption of
> eternal recurrence.
> For many of us with a half-decent notion of personal
> dignity this whole
> thing about procreation, copulation and life on
> earth etc, simply cannot
> be satisfying in itself. The fact that we have
> alimentary canals is
> enough for me not to love mankind.
> To affirm our humanity creatively just because one
> has no choice and
> that it will recur, is sheer bullshit. There has to
> be a better motive
> force for the authentic man: even God or hedonism 
> are more sensible
> concepts! Our Hindu quasi-suicidal karmic
> renunication works twenty
> times better. And Deleuze and Stendhal's real thing
> is a thousand times
> better.
> Oh, and i just realised recently, Zarathustra was a
> dysfunctional
> incapable of giving unconditional love and kept
> running back into his
> cave. Same with Nz.
> The nebulosity of the mind that results from Nz is
> closer to idiocy and
> self-forgetfulness. Petty souls become megalomaniacs
> when they read Nz
> because he excites an alpha-male-like fuzziness of
> the ego, expands it
> into an unreal zone and distances man from his basic
> emotions: towards
> which these have to be applied. Unconditional love
> and the gift-giving
> capacity spoken of by Cixous and Derrida require a
> far greater strength
> than Nz was capable of in his works or in his life.
> Christ never ran into a cave - his strength was that
> he could accept
> people and love them, sure we on the Nz list think
> that half of
> humanity, including many of us, are muck. But how
> many of us have learnt
> to love any damn thing deeply, more than ourselves?
> The eros with which
> we connect to the world alone can redeem. That's our
> design. Fuck
> Marcuse and Fromm, eros for me is the conscious and
> wilful subjugation
> of the mind to the emotion. It is the strength of
> "weakness." I know
> it's a terrible contradiction -  but no one on a Nz
> list should have
> anything against contrdictions, no?
> 	--- from list
> ---

Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints!

	--- from list ---


Driftline Main Page


Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005