Philosophy Now Forum

Nietzsche used the idea of the eternal return as a device for upholding his ideas and passions. Its as if he didn't really care to examine the idea very closely, if at all. It was like a melody he heard and loved so used it in his prose and poetry. I think he should have looked at it more seriously.

Yes, the idea is appealingly poetic but completely unsubstantiated. Nietzsche as a romantic? Hmm. His stated views on women had the air of a lover scorned IMO.

His romantic drives had no other course beside that of sublimation, whether scorned or not. This inevitably embittered him to some extent, as it would anyone, but he rode it well on the whole. I think the unfinished nature of his eternal recurrence idea bespeaks an attitude of humility toward the limits of what he was capable of giving philosophically.

I never understood why he rejected the idea that there is no improvement with each cycle of incarnation, but a mirror image of what previously occurred. Observation tells me that things tend toward evolution and advancement with entropy as a natural side product to that. Nietzsche's formula does not allow entropy and this seems as a bit of avoidance and side-stepping on his part.

Greta wrote:Yes, the idea is appealingly poetic but completely unsubstantiated. Nietzsche as a romantic? Hmm. His stated views on women had the air of a lover scorned IMO.

That's not what is really meant by romanticism, which is better defined as emotion, as opposed to realism and reasoning. When I speak of ridding philosophy of romanticism, I speak of weeding out emotion and feeling, and replacing it with what should be there; reason.

As for eternal return, it's unprovable horseshit, and flogging a dead horse (get the joke there?)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Turin_Horse

As to his love-life, it's possible he contracted syphilis from his first encounter, with a prostitute. It also may have been his last encounter. Don't quote me on this last bit.

There is no evidence at all he contracted syphillus, this was a beat up by one of his first biographers, who was antagonistic toward him. Modern research points toward a long acting tumour of the brain behind his right eye, or a possible genetic brain disorder (his father had something similar).

Bernard wrote:There is no evidence at all he contracted syphillus, this was a beat up by one of his first biographers, who was antagonistic toward him. Modern research points toward a long acting tumour of the brain behind his right eye, or a possible genetic brain disorder (his father had something similar).

Or tertiary syphilis.

Dalek Prime wrote:

Greta wrote:Yes, the idea is appealingly poetic but completely unsubstantiated. Nietzsche as a romantic? Hmm. His stated views on women had the air of a lover scorned IMO.

That's not what is really meant by romanticism, which is better defined as emotion, as opposed to realism and reasoning. When I speak of ridding philosophy of romanticism, I speak of weeding out emotion and feeling, and replacing it with what should be there; reason.

I know. The last bit was a gratuitous jab, I admit. My actual point was that Neitzsche's eternal return idea is a romantic rather than practical notion.

Dalek Prime wrote:As for eternal return, it's unprovable horseshit, and flogging a dead horse (get the joke there?)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Turin_Horse

Too ignorant to get it until reading your link. Is that a double or a triple rederence? Did you read my rant on another thread about flogging a dead horse?

But he used it as a 'formula' - a philosophical device - as well as in a poetic sense.

been there, done that...

-Imp

Greta wrote:... My actual point was that Neitzsche's eternal return idea is a romantic rather than practical notion.

Depends what you mean by practical, try it out sometime. They next time you have a moral decision to make assume that it is true that you'll be coming back to repeat this action eternally and weigh this in as a factor.

Arising_uk wrote:

Greta wrote:... My actual point was that Neitzsche's eternal return idea is a romantic rather than practical notion.

Depends what you mean by practical, try it out sometime. They next time you have a moral decision to make assume that it is true that you'll be coming back to repeat this action eternally and weigh this in as a factor.

Will that work? It's probably not the first time she's done it.

Dalek Prime wrote:Will that work? It's probably not the first time she's done it.

Always was the critique for me when I read him 'How do I know I'm at the start?'. But then just add the caveat that I am and see how it goes.

Dalek Prime wrote:

Arising_uk wrote:

Greta wrote:... My actual point was that Neitzsche's eternal return idea is a romantic rather than practical notion.

Depends what you mean by practical, try it out sometime. They next time you have a moral decision to make assume that it is true that you'll be coming back to repeat this action eternally and weigh this in as a factor.

Will that work? It's probably not the first time she's done it.

If a person believes that they will have to go through all the same struggles again unless they apply greater focus and rigour to their activities, then that might affect their performance in a number of ways. Some excel under pressure while others are distracted by it, and it also depends on the kind of pressure.

Wouldn't a simple maxim like "Do it once, do it well" achieve a similar function without the pressure or metaphysics? Perhaps it would instill less drive in those who thrive under pressure than the implied threat of recurring struggles, but it also lacks the anxiety downside, not to mention the arguable metaphysical claim.

Greta wrote:... , do it well ...

Is the issue.
p.s.
Although I take your points. My take was about your practicality issue with the maxim.