Nietzsche's Concept of Eternal Recurrence

Friedrich Nietzsche’s own skepticism symbolized the secular changes in contemporary Western civilization, in which he details mankind’s break away from faith into a new rule of chaos. In Book 5 of The Gay Science, Nietzsche establishes that “God is dead”, meaning that modern Europe has abandoned religion in favor of rationality and science (Nietzsche 279). From this death, the birth of a ‘new’ infinite blossoms in which the world is open to an unlimited amount of interpretations that do not rely on the solid foundations of faith in religion or science. However, in contrast to the other philosophers of his age such as Immanuel Kant and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Nietzsche deviates from the omniscient determinism of history towards a

The opposition to the issue tends to have some great points but they also have some good resolutions to the problem at hand. The opposition “

In this paper, I will first elaborate on my understanding of Thomas Nagel’s theory as to why death, a permanent nonexistent state, is an undesirable state of being. I will then argue as to why I believe that death is a misfortune using the argument that death terminates the positive experience of life as well as rebut the counter-argument for why death is good because it gives meaning to life.

Life repeats itself; literally, in the case of reincarnation, but also in the repetition of apparently identical days in which we sometimes consider ourselves trapped. While drinking one evening Phil asks Gus, the cameraman, “What would you do if there was no tomorrow? Like if it was never going to end. If everyday was the same and you were stuck…nothing you did mattered?”(Ramis, 1993). Things happen; both bad and good, and they happen over and over and over again.

After connecting the passage to Nietzsche’s opinion of a fulfilled lifestyle, I believe that he would disagree with Smith’s way of living. The two have contrasting ideas, in which Nietzsche’s seems to be a more ethical one in the fullest sense.

Throughout his career, Nietzsche’s philosophy becomes known for it’s challenging of Christianity’s fundamental principles and traditional morality and ethics. His notions followed themes regarding the edification or enhancement of individual and cultural health through the means of respecting and valuing the powers of will, creativity, life and nature in the direct reality of the world we live in. Nietzsche’s emphasis of an embodiment with the present, direct world comes in direct opposition to religious ideas concerning life after death or value beyond the knowable, tangible world we are situated within—exemplifying him as secular philosopher concerned with the human experience. Nietzsche’s efforts and approaches to human experience centralize around the question: how is it that one should live? Through this framework, academically, Nietzsche is often referred to as one of the first original existentialist thinkers.

The use of opposing sources was also well integrated into the overall argument, and the overall paper is objective. However, some of the arguments are not fully clear as they are not surmised and repeated.

In this paper, we will discuss Friedrich Nietzsche’s perspective based on the main question in unit 3, also known as “What is God?” Friedrich Nietzsche has created a vast amount of controversy and cultural influence since his publication in 1883. Nietzsche is known for his intricate work that has a substantial reputation throughout history. For example, in “The Gay Science,” his most known and recognized statement was “God is dead.” His bold declaration led to controversy in religion, nihilism, and morals.

gather together into a unity so strangely variegated an assortment as he is” (KSA I p. 337). Even so Oger does acknowledge unpublished articles in which Nietzsche attempted to prove eternal return scientifically. But, because Nietzsche did not publish the proof despite having ample time to do so, Oger disregards the writing and speculates that the reason the proof was not published was because it undermined Nietzsche’s true intent.

Cosmologically, the eternal recurrence suggests that every detail of our lives will recur in exactly the same way ad infinitum. However, I am less concerned with the cosmology of the eternal recurrence and more concerned with the philosophy Nietzsche derives from it. Because we are fated to perpetually relive our lives, Nietzsche says we must reinterpret all events in our life as emanating from the self. Seen in this way, even our greatest errors are understood as an expression of self, an act of self-definition; and can thereby be positively interpreted. Nietzsche discusses the eternal recurrence, and its harrowing implication, in Gay Science:

From the death of a single human being, to the death of a star, to the death of galaxies, the answer throngs, and echoes infinitely throughout the universe:

Throughout this semester, I have learned quite a lot about several philosophers. Some who I found interesting, compelling, mediocre, or boring. As Nietzsche once said, “Plato is boring.” To steer back to the topic, there are philosophers in my opinion who revealed wisdom in their reasoning of their theories. Also, there are some philosophers’ theories that have an absence of wisdom, which only in the end, would only add more problems to society. The philosophers that I believed had reasoning in their theories were Nietzsche, Machiavelli, Sextus Empiricus, Aristotle, and Kierkegaard. Then the philosopher that I believe added more problems to society due to their lack of wisdom was Plato.

Nietzsche believes that human beings should drive themselves to live a more worthwhile life instead of playing it safe in hopes of a content afterlife. I think that pushing yourself beyond your limits opens up a pool of opportunities and new places for you to explore. People like Leonardo da Vinci chose this path of greatness by aspiring more and more for a fuller life. He explored the realms of comfort and moved past them. In fact, he designed the first helicopter centuries before the helicopter even became reality on Earth. Greatness is achieved only if you want it. Someone must yearn for it and achieve it through hard work because it is

You must either agree or disagree with the issue that is given in the essay question.

Whereas, Fischer denies William’s dilemma, because his argument is too narrow in thinking, because William asserts the agent would possess only one categorical desire. However, Fischer denies William’s assertion, because the immortal agent would not be pursuing only one interest. Fischer questions William’s mode of reasoning on why the agent must pursue only one interest; Fischer proposes that the individual would possess a package of categorical desires, which would enable the agent to move in to their immortal future without succumbing to eternal boredom. “Certainly, an immortal life could consist in a certain mix of activities, possibly including friendship, love, family, intellectual, artistic and athletic activity, sensual delights, and so forth” (216). Rather relentlessly pursuing one good, the packages of categorical desires enable the agent to move between pleasures and keep themselves busy. Furthermore, Fischer rejects William’s assertion that the immortal agent cannot undergo any form of boredom, and that they must constantly be absorbed in their environment. Fischer asserts all mortal lives consists of temporary moments of boredom/pains, which enable the agent to proceed to mentally stimulating environment/goods (261). Furthermore, the possible issue that the agent would have a