History is Bunkum

History is Bunkum.


World History is redundant.

Only 'original history' matters - the set of Amor Fati.

Eternal recurrence destroys all history beyond 'my life' and 'my struggle'.

It clears the way for Amor Fati.

It enables forgetting.

Light another cigarette,

Learn to forget,

Learn to forget ...


III

History is replaced by a telling [mythos].

As Foucault had it, before the paradigm of 'History' [which is shattered by the Eternal Recurrence], there was the paradigm of Order.

The Return of Order.

And as 'man' was the invention of the Historical paradigm, so too is man shattered.

The new man of the next paradigm is the Uebermenschen, the creature of The New Order.



IV

'The Eternal Recurrence of the Same' - and yet there is no 'sameness' in things
to Nietzsche.

Logic is founded on this false perspective, i.e. that things can be the same.

Does it follow from the assumption that 'matter is limited and time infinite'
that sameness in terms of matter would recur?

It seems not - for if matter is infinitely divisible - as Nietzsche thought -
and there are no ultimate atoms, then matter is infinitely transformable.

Even a finite amount of matter would have infinite depths of change that would
resist any 'sameness'.

The discourse of similarity in history is shattered.

V

The doctrine of the eternal recurrence should be seen as a destructor - we have to pass through its blood-soaked jaws in order to understand what it means to view things as being ahistorical and asimilar.

And overhuman.

Like all things related to knowledge it is self-refuting.

And as the will of power is behind the will to knowledge, then the eternal recurrence is a highpoint of the will of power.

Knowledge as the great destructive force.

Dionysian.

The man in who the will to knowledge is the strongest is the most dangerous, most evil man.

Like Heraclitus he will cover himself in shit and give himself to be devoured by shit-eating dogs.

Difference between the priest and the philosopher, the former covers himself in perfume and avoids the deepest knowledge by giving himself over to God.

Zarathustra the godless.


VI

The etrnal recurrence does not 'rid' us of belief in the soul, but it rather transforms such superstitions.

Of course, those things which are overvalued or devalued may be ridded, but other things of intrinsic worth will be revalued, transvalued.

Those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make mad - the mad god was then such a revaluation.

Similarly, do we have soul enough to make a holocaust of all our superstitions, to blacken every sun?

Aporia is good for the soul.

And is a final solution itself a superstition?


VII

Thinking is a limitation ...

Think the unthinkable - that is the birth of philosophy.

Think what hasn't been thought before ...

The Jewish prophet says that there is nothing new under the sun, but the Aryan philosopher says that there have been many suns, and many suns that have yet to flame into existence ...

The overhuman itself is an invitation to think the unthinkable ...

Consciousness is continually evolving too ... thinking continually changes ... ancient Greek consciousness was very different to present day consciousness ...

Nietzsche's interest in science has been downplayed by commentators; from his earliest days he had an avid interest in science [such as chemistry and physics] and kept himself abrest of the very latest developments.

Indeed, his interest in the Pre-Platonics was due to their being physicists - a huge gap in Nietzsche appreciation has been filled by Whitlock's translation and commentary on Nietzsche's lectures on the Pre-platonic philosophers [not to be confused with 'Philosophy in the Tragic Age of the Greeks'].
I believe that not until one has read the tenth lecture on Heraclitus in that series can one really understand the foundations of Nietzsche's theories of the will to power and the eternal recurrence.

The belief in an end-time [finite time] is typical of Christianity etc.,

Concepts of time [as Kant pointed out] are merely a part of the necessary perceptual apparatus used by humans to comprehend what they think is the world.

Time does not exist as such - hence the continual use of metaphors to describe it [as lines, circles, elipses, zig-zags etc.,]

Finitude, like time is the natural result of finite human reasoning.

If time does not exist then nor does finitude.
If Nietzsche allows the so-called unthinkable concept of infinity as regards time, then he should allow such for matter ... as there is no real distinction between time and matter.

If matter, like time, is purely a product of the mind, as claimed, then matter itself does not exist as such and cannot be finite.

We must think the unthinkable - no doubt at one stage to think a soul was unthinkable. But then the concept was gradually debased .... Christianised ... 'Platonism for the people'.

Let us think the unthinkable again ... let us think the eternal return in an unthinkable fashion ... as we are doing, if I am not "mistaken!"

VIII

At the dawn of philosophy we have the apeiron of Anaximander ...

The empire of the unthinkable [and the unthought] is far larger than the empire of the thinkable [and the thought]. Philosophy aims to make constant inroads into that vast 'empire of the senseless'.

This is not to say that any empty conjecture has value - indeed, a conjecture is often merely the thinkable. God has become a mere conjecture [although it began as an unthinkable, I would wager].

We must think the unthinkable as being conceivable as being real: hence the eternal recurrence being presented as a scientific doctrine!

We only learn as we speak - thank you Socrates, you were ugly but we are indebted to you too.

The unthinkable has to begin as poetry [and before that music]: only then does it enter philosophy - ah! we are the endebted to the muses!

The eternal recurrence is an attempt to make such an inroad into the unthinkable - note that it is Zarathustra's ape who takes the doctrine only literally. This is not to deny the unthinkable possibility that the doctrine may be literally true, but that is not its raison d'etre. It is proffered rather as a destructive, transformative and therefore Dionysian doctrine.

The unsayable and the unthinkable - those are my two ravens!

Some say that "existence is the will to power"; and yet doesn't the word existence imply something other than 'life'? Isn't ex-istence a standing-out? Does all life have this quality?

Does a stone exist in this sense - i.e. is it imbued with force [Kraft]?

If so there is a soul in all things - how unthinkable!

How I love those who adhere to that doctrine!

To say "existence as a whole" - how unthinkable is that! Where does that existence end?

Isn't that rather impish, the idea that a mere human can impose a soul on a stone? Surely it is soul which emanated matter and made the man - it was soul that imposed Being upon the human, vegetable, mineral and animal!

Lo, the soul doctrine is reversing itself as it was taught my brethren!

Falsity implies truth ... what is truth?