wantonwomanmeohmy asked: Hi : I come to your blog for my regular Nietzsche fix (thanks). I haven't studied him but I enjoy working my way through his words and finding I agree, almost totally, most of the time. It's recently occurred to me, that he wrote in absolutes and had a tendency to be a wee bit endearingly hysterical. I wonder if he wasn't a bit of a drama queen with a wicked sense of humour and a flair for writing, dressed in the armour of his colleagues and contemporaries, to keep them all wondering. I wonder!
Hello! I haven’t ‘studied’ him in an official capacity either— just readings here and there in some liberal arts classes. He definitely enjoys absolutes, and I can totally see him being a drama queen. I suppose a slowly degenerating mental stability didn’t help :)
I always put Nietzsche down whenever I get one of those ‘if you could have dinner with anyone’ questions. I really wonder what he was like as a person.
Thus the world of eternal recurrence is a phenomenon of will. As Nietzsche says in the final lines of The Will to Power: “This world is will to power and nothing besides! And you are also are will to power–and nothing besides!” At this point not only knowledge as such but even the concept of will itself becomes useless, insofar as will is nothing more than a striving against things that resist it. But in the standpoint of eternal recurrence both the resistances and the striving against them have been overcome. As Nietzsche says, the world is “divine play” (göttliches Spiel). this does not mean that whatever resists or expends effort simply disappears; if it did, there would be no “play.” It is rather a standpoint where resistance is resistance and yet becomes non-resistance, where striving is striving and yet becomes not-striving.
To eliminate the concept of will does not mean to return to the standpoint of a bystander with respect to the world-process. To say “well, then! Once more!” is the greatest will and resolution. But through such will time becomes an arc, and the world is understood as something that eternally recurs. That the world worlds as it does is its “play”. That the self wills means that it wills really and truly, even though it is no more than the play of waves in a recurring world. Thus will in the ordinary sense is overcome, as is necessity. Necessity in its immediacy as fate is play. Necessity in the sense of something that binds disappears. This is why Nietzsche refers to eternal recurrence at some times as fatalism and at others as the counterweight to it. In contrast to traditional forms of fatalism, absolute fate comes to mean absolute freedom: “to liberate absolute necessity entirely from purpose … it is only the innocence of becoming that gives us the greatest courage and the greatest freedom.” This is the ultimate standpoint at which recurrence is said to be fate.
Nishitani Keiji: The Self-Overcoming of Nihilism (via fuckyeahexistentialism
das-kind-heisst-einsamkeit asked: I've heard a lot of things about "When Nietzsche Wept" and I still don't know for sure if that is a good reading. I'm open for judgement but I don't believe in books ABOUT Nietzsche, if you know what I mean. Have you read it? What do you think about it? Btw, where are you from? =)
I actually haven’t heard too much about it good or bad, and I haven’t read it or seen the movie (maybe I should?). I imagine any novel that can get made into a movie must take liberties in focus to preserve an interesting plot, though.
I think Lou Salome herself wrote a biography on Nietzsche, which might be interesting as they actually did know each other very well. I’ve read excerpts of that though, and it’s not an easy read…
As to where I’m from— I’m Canadian, although I currently live in New York City.
A brief pause while I am on vacation. Happy early New Year 2014, all!
God may be dead, but whether or not you celebrate his birth today, a merry Christmas and happy holidays to you all!