The eternal return is the thought that changes, or re-contextualizes, everything! Nietzsche may not have originated the idea (somewhere, I forget which text, he even speculates that Heraclitus might have thought of it before him), but N does the best work of making it his own and presenting it in the most powerful way(s) possible. FWIW I don't see anything in modern cosmology that rules out eternal recurrence as a physical possibility, except for baldly asserting that the Big Bang is _the absolute beginning of everything_, the universe, all universes. There is no evidence for this, and it goes beyond current science. There are some modern cyclic cosmologies in contention, such as Paul Steinhardt's version of the "Big Bounce" model or Roger Penroses Conformal Cyclic Cosmology. While these aren't mainstream orthodoxy, they're interesting avenues of research. ER seems to follow inexorably from almost any cosmology that cycles infinitely many times. With literal eternity to play with, there's nothing to forbid the universe from repeating itself, at least at local scales like planets and solar systems - there are only so many ways that a galaxy, for example, can be constituted. I think Max Tegmark even calculated the number! And while that number of ways is insanely large to our human minds, it's still miniscule (like all finite numbers) next to infinity. I tend to find cyclic cosmologies intuitively more plausible than the "just-so" cosmology of... absolute beginning -> middle -> absolute end... that we find in the life denying holy books. Was that life? Well then, once more!
The idea that "whatever perishes, returns to be" was part of Epicurean thought. You can find it in Lucretius, in the 1st century BC. Since the Epicureans believed that everything is made of atoms of matter, it led to the idea that everything eventually disintegrates and the atoms disperse, but then, within infinity, all these atoms come together again. But Nietzsche takes it further, and describes time as a ring, in which every order of things necessarily leads to the next order of things, until things retrun to the way they were. We will later see why this is crucial to his philosophy. At this moment in the story, as we see, it actually creates a crisis in Zarathustra's thought.
@@thebronze3098 Its actually even older than that, and can be found in the Hindu Vedas. I'm not well versed in them at all, but both Schopenhauer and Nietzsche were (especially Schopenhauer, who quotes Hindu texts in his books) For example, in chapter 2 of the Bhagavadgita, Krishna says that: "Nver the spirit was born; the spirit shall cease to be never. Never was [the] time it was not; End and Begining are dreams! Birthless and deathless and changeless remains the spirit forever Death has not touched it at all!"
The Hindus had their version of it, and I know it influenced Schopenhauers account, and that he was a student of Hnduism and Buddhism. Nietzsche may have been more influenced by Heraclitus, being a Philologist and having much more research in Greek philosophy under his belt than research in Hinduism, but he was fairly knowledgeable in Hindu religion and history as well. I think this research influenced the development of his theory.
Thank you so much for this! I was feeling lost in the book and you have helped me. I now follow along and love your commentary.❤
Epic, thanks a lot!
The eternal return is the thought that changes, or re-contextualizes, everything! Nietzsche may not have originated the idea (somewhere, I forget which text, he even speculates that Heraclitus might have thought of it before him), but N does the best work of making it his own and presenting it in the most powerful way(s) possible.
FWIW I don't see anything in modern cosmology that rules out eternal recurrence as a physical possibility, except for baldly asserting that the Big Bang is _the absolute beginning of everything_, the universe, all universes. There is no evidence for this, and it goes beyond current science.
There are some modern cyclic cosmologies in contention, such as Paul Steinhardt's version of the "Big Bounce" model or Roger Penroses Conformal Cyclic Cosmology. While these aren't mainstream orthodoxy, they're interesting avenues of research. ER seems to follow inexorably from almost any cosmology that cycles infinitely many times. With literal eternity to play with, there's nothing to forbid the universe from repeating itself, at least at local scales like planets and solar systems - there are only so many ways that a galaxy, for example, can be constituted. I think Max Tegmark even calculated the number! And while that number of ways is insanely large to our human minds, it's still miniscule (like all finite numbers) next to infinity.
I tend to find cyclic cosmologies intuitively more plausible than the "just-so" cosmology of... absolute beginning -> middle -> absolute end... that we find in the life denying holy books.
Was that life? Well then, once more!
The idea that "whatever perishes, returns to be" was part of Epicurean thought. You can find it in Lucretius, in the 1st century BC. Since the Epicureans believed that everything is made of atoms of matter, it led to the idea that everything eventually disintegrates and the atoms disperse, but then, within infinity, all these atoms come together again.
But Nietzsche takes it further, and describes time as a ring, in which every order of things necessarily leads to the next order of things, until things retrun to the way they were. We will later see why this is crucial to his philosophy. At this moment in the story, as we see, it actually creates a crisis in Zarathustra's thought.
@@thebronze3098 Its actually even older than that, and can be found in the Hindu Vedas. I'm not well versed in them at all, but both Schopenhauer and Nietzsche were (especially Schopenhauer, who quotes Hindu texts in his books)
For example, in chapter 2 of the Bhagavadgita, Krishna says that:
"Nver the spirit was born; the spirit shall cease to be never.
Never was [the] time it was not; End and Begining are dreams!
Birthless and deathless and changeless remains the spirit forever
Death has not touched it at all!"
The Hindus had their version of it, and I know it influenced Schopenhauers account, and that he was a student of Hnduism and Buddhism. Nietzsche may have been more influenced by Heraclitus, being a Philologist and having much more research in Greek philosophy under his belt than research in Hinduism, but he was fairly knowledgeable in Hindu religion and history as well. I think this research influenced the development of his theory.
I always thought the dwarf was another person?
How did you publish your book?
On Amazon
@@thebronze3098 I see now it is an ebook. Cool. Will buy eventually.
What did you think of my book?