510Re: Connecting Nietzsche's Fundamental Concepts.
- Sep 7, 2010Well, I said "it---or at least the *possibility* of it---must be believed in". In the notebooks, Nietzsche likens the possibility to the possibility of eternal damnation: what effect the notion of that possibility has had on the course of history.
Also, to be looked upon favorably by Nietzsche is not to be selected in the sense meant. That selection is rather like *natural* selection: some (genes) survive, others die out.
As for the possibility of it, I think it is as well possible as eternal novelty, as both are unthinkable (the ER because nothingness is unthinkable, and EN because infinity is unthinkable).
Of those who believe in the possibility of it, then, those who "cannot bear it stand condemned", whereas "those who find it the greatest benefit are chosen to rule." (WP 1053 (1884).) And those who do *not* believe in the possibility of it?
"This doctrine is mild against those who do not believe in it, it knows no hells and no threats. Whoever does not believe has a *fleeting* life in his consciousness."
Will not those who find it the greatest benefit probably also prevail over those who do *not* believe in the possibility of it? And will there not also be two types among those who don't believe in it? Those who find the idea attractive and those who find it repulsive? So that there arises the following order of the chance to prevail?
1) Those who believe in the possibility of it and find the idea attractive;
2) those who do *not* believe in the possibility, but find the idea attractive;
3) those who do not believe in the possibility and find the idea repulsive;
4) those who *do* believe in the possibility and find the idea repulsive.
--- In email@example.com, "Ian" <ianmathwiz7@...> wrote:
> I don't think people would actually have to *believe* in the eternal recurrence for it to be a valuable means to breeding and selection, as Nietzche seems to imply in e.g. TGS that one would only have to be able to *will* that it be the case in order to truly affirm life. Presumably, a person who wants the eternal recurrence to happen, but just cannot believe that it will (maybe he finds arguments its favor unpersuasive, maybe he sees no evidence in its favor) will still be looked upon favorably by Nietzche.
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "sauwelios" <sauwelios@> wrote:
> > --- In email@example.com, "sauwelios" <sauwelios@> wrote: [snipped]
> > >
> > > "Your pride (oh you noble Stoics) wants to prescribe your morality, your ideal, to nature, even to nature, and make the latter incorporate the former[!]"
> > > (BGE 9.)
> > >
> > "Oh you noble Stoics" should be between square, not round, brackets.
> > > And the teaching of the eternal recurrence of the-world-as-will-to-power is the perfect means for the achievement of this end:
> > >
> > > "[T]he theory of eternal recurrence [...] as a means of breeding and selection."
> > > (The Will to Power, section 462. Cf. 1053, 1055-58.)
> > >
> > > And it's fitting that someone who belongs to the Overman type should have that very type, the sprouting and flourishing of individuals belonging to that very type, as his ideal: see Twilight of the Idols, 'Forays of an Untimely Man', section 20: Dionysus there represents the superhuman type, Ariadne the human type.
> > I meant section 19 here, though section 20 is indeed also of note: it implies that where the value judgment "beautiful" arises, there arises a *love* (the German word for "ugly" is *hässlich*, "hately"):
> > "What does man love there? But there is no doubt: the *ascension of his type*."
> > (section 20, paraphrase.)
> > Also, in regard to what Ian said yesterday about Nietzsche actually arguing for the eternal recurrence in the notebooks: this may be explained by the notion of the theory of eternal recurrence as a means of breeding and selection. In order for it to work as such a means, it---or at least the *possibility* of it---must be believed in by those it is to select and/or those it is to weed out.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>