[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 296 KB, 1920x1080, 2002summer_friedrich-nietzsche-god-is-dead_1920x1080.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12754292 No.12754292 [Reply] [Original]

Do you want eternal recurrence to be true? Or do you despise your own fate?

>> No.12754294

I always thought he looked part black in this pic.

>> No.12754349

>>12754292
It's still a toss-up for me. If I can change the last 2-2.5 years it'll be all good, is my current opinion.

>> No.12754355
File: 68 KB, 633x758, 1504020792737.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12754355

>>12754292
>believe in eternal recurrance as a teenager
>figured it makes sense since everything would ultimately come back together in the 'big crunch' after big bang and start again
>read about the expansion of the universe ACCELERATING for no discernable reason
>read up on this discovery and phantom energy
>find out about the 'big rip'
>mfw

>> No.12754359

>>12754292
you mean we're stuck with frog posters for an infinite number of eternities ?

>> No.12754400

>>12754355

>Thinking the universe actually exists in 2019

Absolutely NPC. The universe is infinite and everlasting, we are just in a finite subsection.

>> No.12754422

>>12754400
Elaborate on your position.

>> No.12754434

>>12754355
Nietzschean eternal recurrence isn't really a physical theory

>> No.12754435

FINISH THE CYCLE OF ETERNAL RETURN

>> No.12754463

>>12754292
I believe the universe is cyclical, which I hope is true, eternal recurrence? Not so sure.

>> No.12754474
File: 97 KB, 618x410, banksy28.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12754474

>>12754434
I just (again, as a teenager) found it intuitive and grounded it in that physical theory so when I found out about the accelerating expansion I was pretty bothered back then. It's just one of those things that made me rethink my position.

To answer >>12754292 more precisely, I think it would be comforting but I don't believe it's the case. Either way I don't despise my own fate and I'm thankful to live and experience life with all it's nuances.

>> No.12754480

>>12754474
acceleration doesn't really prove the big rip or big crunch, both theories are entirely up in the air, scientifically

>> No.12754502

Yaldabaoth I challenge thee,
surpass this corporeal ken;
release from your cage of reality
this vital spirit of men.
sever our chains of mortality;
Excritcate us in death

>> No.12754507

>>12754422
"no"

>> No.12754514

>>12754507
Based lynch

>> No.12754515

>>12754292
If you despise your own fate why not find meaning in your suffering? We're all dead anyway.

>> No.12755104

>>12754292
There are moments when I do and I strive to have more of those moments.

>> No.12755110

>>12754400
>calls someone NPC for thinking the universe exists
>the universe is infinite and everlasting
>the universe is
huh?

>> No.12755277

>>12754292
True? It is the highest true, that is to say, falsity: the delirious simulacrum of a doctrine...

>> No.12755278

>>12754294
Hehe I can see it.

>> No.12755295

>>12754434
so you haven't read much nietzsche. he says that it's a physical theory explicitly in will to power

>> No.12755693

>>12754502
Are these Morbid Angel lyrics?

>> No.12755710

>>12754292
Anybody interested in eternal recurrence should check out The Unbearable Lightness of Being.

>> No.12755720

There's so many annoying people around me, that's my main problem with eternal recurrence.

>> No.12755804

>>12754434
yes it is lmfao

>>12754292
Who cares? I wouldn't be aware of it.

>>12755720
reddit-tier answer

>> No.12755921

>>12754292
Nothing can ever return to the same point or state, even in a system that is only indefinite (and not infinite) or are we to argue, that Universe is not infinite, and has defined limitudes and borders so to speak?

In universal existence a return to a same state is an imposibility. In total Possibility the particular possibilities which constitute the conditioned states of existence are necessarily indefinitely multiple; to deny this is also to limit Possibility. This must be admitted on pain of contradiction, and suffices to establish that no being or creature, physical or spiritual, can pass twice through the same state.

>> No.12755953

>>12755921
>being this clueless
You don't understand what the eternal return is for. It's plausibility has no bearing on its use, which is as an ethical conundrum intended to make you reconsider certain unsatisfactory aspects of your life. It's not meant to be a metaphysical truth

>> No.12755985

>>12755953
So why call it eternal recurrence?

Returning to the multiple states of the being, we must make an observation that these states can be conceived as simultaneous as well as successive, and even that in their entirety their succession can be admitted only as a symbolic representation since time is a condition proper to only one of these states; even duration, whatever its mode, can only be attributed to something that has pre-existed; thus to call it Eternal Return would be an absurdity in itself.

If there would exist a causal chain between the various states of actions man lives through his lifetime to make those choices again; it would imply precisely simultaneity or the coexistence of those states of being itself.

>>12755953
>It's plausibility has no bearing on its use, which is as an ethical conundrum intended to make you reconsider certain unsatisfactory aspects of your life. It's not meant to be a metaphysical truth

The only logical conclusion one could make from such point on: all is ever as it was.

>> No.12756004

>>12755921
Whether it's plausible or not doesn't matter. What matters is your response to being instructed of such a premise. Do you hate the idea or love it? If you love it, you love yourself, and if you hate it, you hate yourself.

>> No.12756030

>>12756004
As I explained here >>12755985

I can only come to a conclusion: all is ever as it was.

>> No.12756071

Well, it's a pretty stupid idea, so no. I would rather that the world would not be inexplicably and eternally stupid.

>> No.12756080
File: 50 KB, 544x800, 592b10af974a45ac5bad5b851ae725bc.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12756080

Do you want the theory of the multiple states of the Being to be true? Or are you too attached to your human state?

>> No.12756101

>>12756030
Still missing the point. If eternal recurrence is true, then this is all there is. There is no afterlife, and there isn't even nothingness after death. More importantly, wanting to believe it is true indicates that you WANT this to be the case. It is a hypothetical that is supposed to reveal to you where you stand on the matter of life and death. Do you ultimately moralize in favor of life, or in favor of death?

>> No.12756114
File: 43 KB, 638x544, 636B9C2D-0FDF-4DE1-B3E5-418FFA8AAE73.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12756114

>>12755110
hunan language is so wrapped in ontology as that is what language is : a compression algorithm of formless void. through this we convince ourselves form exists or anything is

yes i am an ontological nihilist, because i care about the truth

>> No.12756225

>>12756101
>There is no afterlife, and there isn't even nothingness after death.

If that is/would be/we suppose to be the case: then I personally would come to a conclusion that life itself, would be a Great Parody.

> Do you ultimately moralize in favor of life, or in favor of death?

If given the conditions and considerations given above: then even Death would be not a be anything else but the end of an Illusion.

>> No.12756251

>>12756225
>I personally would come to a conclusion that life itself, would be a Great Parody.
So would I. It would be nothing more than a gigantic playground for me to exercise my will over then. And if the belief turns you into a fat sloth that sits around and jerks off all day, that's on you — that's who you really are.

If you hate the idea and don't want it to be true, then you moralize in favor of death. In eternal recurrence, there is no "death" as it's typically understood.

>> No.12756282

>>12755804
>will to power
It was written by his sister and her antisemitic fiancee

>> No.12756292

>>12756282
It was compiled by them from his notes, not written by them, retard

>> No.12756306

>>12756292
lol, sure bud.

>> No.12756339

>>12756282
le troll faec

>> No.12756439

One would have to be an idiot to think that Will to Power is genuinely one of Nietzsche's works...
The divergence from his previous works, the fact that his bitch sister 'compiled' his notes, and the fact that Nietzsche himself was certifiably insane at that point of his life as stand testament to the ridiculousness of such an assertion.

>> No.12756463

>>12756439
Nietzsche reader here. Point me to a passage from it that you think is incompatible with his philosophy, and I will explain to you how you're wrong.

>> No.12756468

>>12756463
don't take his bait, bro

>> No.12756483

>>12756282
he mentions it elsewhere.

>> No.12756488

>>12756463
>Nietzsche reader
Watch out, folks!

>> No.12756496
File: 290 KB, 200x150, 1326247677765.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12756496

>>12756488
Nietzsche reader of 10+ years*

>>12756468
No worries. I have trained for this.

>> No.12756527
File: 37 KB, 497x371, 1546287909988.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12756527

>>12756496

>> No.12756530

>>12756527
I sense much fear in this one

>> No.12756538
File: 109 KB, 960x720, 1503865835182.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12756538

>>12755295
>>12755804
>>12756483
these are the brainlets you are browsing with

>> No.12756545

>>12756114
Things exist because I say they do.

>> No.12756568

>What is good? - All that heightens the feelings of power, the will to power, power itself in man. What is bad? - All that proceeds from weakness. What is happiness? - The feeling that power increases - that a resistance is overcome
>They all want to get to the throne: this is their madness—as if happiness were sitting on the throne! Often it is mud that sits on the throne—and often the throne also sits on mud.
Two fucking minutes on google.

>> No.12756632

>>12756568
What are you trying to prove here?

>> No.12756642
File: 331 KB, 889x478, 1545739260138.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12756642

>>12756538
glad some zoomers have common sense
just reviewed the fourth part of will to power. never really liked it since it was likely to be fan service but whatever, some of it was legit

>> No.12756701

>>12756632
See
>>12756463

>> No.12756774

Eternal recurrence is just an abstract idea that push you to develop good habits.
He never said it's something really happening.

"When you do something, do it like you want it to happen the same for the rest of your life".
It's exactly how the brain works https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinforcement..

Also read the Gay Science again it's clearly explained.

>> No.12756841

To he who would ponder the question of eternal recurrence: has it not occured to you but once that rather you are a faggot? That many things might return seems less becomming than your own faggotry being so immense as to be singular, a monolith, a monument built from time, never to be matched in this world or another. Yay, what vain repitition might escape the shadow of that towering strength? None, not one. Such are the proportions of your pretension, la la homo man you.

>> No.12756896
File: 326 KB, 742x742, 1551727277837.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12756896

Do brainlets unironically believe eternal recurrence is actually a thing or is it a meme I'm not aware of?

>> No.12756897

>>12756545
Some things do, like your words and stuff...

>> No.12756948

>>12756568
>>12756701
First of all, the second quote is from On the New Idol in TSZ. He explicitly mentions that he is talking about "the state" in that part. He is not refuting or negating will to power there; TSZ is him establishing his own will to power onto life (in an effort to secure the future of his philosophical descendants), which stood opposed to many things, the state and the culture it fosters being one of those things.

Further, his psychological assessment there isn't incompatible with the psychology found in his other books, including Will to Power, or that first quote above it. You have a perspective, and all so-called "knowledge" of other perspectives is merely your interpretation of them. This means that, regardless if we "agree" that words have certain definitions, they ultimately only mean what we want them to mean to ourselves. Nietzsche writes everything with this understanding in mind, about himself and also his readers. His philosophy isn't fact, it's an interpretation, like all other philosophies are. From his perspective, what we all find to be "good" is what increases the feeling of power in us, regardless of what other people say they think is "good."

So does Nietzsche want to clamber to the top, as the members of the state do? Nope... he never lived like that:
>You look up when you wish to be exalted. And I look down because I am exalted.

>> No.12757078

>>12754400
Stop reading Schopenhauer. He can't even write properly!