Eternal Return Hermeneutics in Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Derrida

IF 0.3 0 PHILOSOPHY Open Philosophy Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1515/opphil-2022-0267
Lee Braver
{"title":"Eternal Return Hermeneutics in Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Derrida","authors":"Lee Braver","doi":"10.1515/opphil-2022-0267","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Nietzsche’s Eternal Return (ER) is interpreted in many ways, including by him. I present it as a hermeneutic device, a way of reading texts, especially those whose influence threatens one’s authorial autonomy and/or are later difficult to take ownership of due to philosophical growth. It returns past texts with new interpretations, similar to the way ER leads one to embrace one’s past without changing anything, which radically changes everything from a resented painful burden into a celebrated enhancement of freedom and power. I show how he could have derived the idea from Schopenhauer, his own embarrassing past, by performing the technique on Schopenhauer. The same attitude toward past texts of recreating them according to one’s present interests and concerns simultaneously releases one’s present texts for future readers to impose their readings onto them, just as Zarathustra tells his followers not to follow him. Heidegger takes the idea up in a far more nuanced account than he is usually given credit for and applies it, among other places, to the history of philosophy. All philosophers say the same as it keeps returning. Derrida then recreates this as iterability, the deconstruction of the no/change dichotomy that Nietzsche began.","PeriodicalId":36288,"journal":{"name":"Open Philosophy","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opphil-2022-0267","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Nietzsche’s Eternal Return (ER) is interpreted in many ways, including by him. I present it as a hermeneutic device, a way of reading texts, especially those whose influence threatens one’s authorial autonomy and/or are later difficult to take ownership of due to philosophical growth. It returns past texts with new interpretations, similar to the way ER leads one to embrace one’s past without changing anything, which radically changes everything from a resented painful burden into a celebrated enhancement of freedom and power. I show how he could have derived the idea from Schopenhauer, his own embarrassing past, by performing the technique on Schopenhauer. The same attitude toward past texts of recreating them according to one’s present interests and concerns simultaneously releases one’s present texts for future readers to impose their readings onto them, just as Zarathustra tells his followers not to follow him. Heidegger takes the idea up in a far more nuanced account than he is usually given credit for and applies it, among other places, to the history of philosophy. All philosophers say the same as it keeps returning. Derrida then recreates this as iterability, the deconstruction of the no/change dichotomy that Nietzsche began.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
永恒回归:尼采、海德格尔和德里达的诠释学
尼采的永恒回归(ER)被解读为多种方式,包括他自己。我把它作为一种解释学的手段,一种阅读文本的方式,尤其是那些影响威胁到一个人的作者自主权和/或后来由于哲学的发展而难以拥有的文本。它以新的解释回归过去的文本,类似于《急诊室》引导人们拥抱过去而不改变任何东西的方式,这从根本上改变了一切,从令人憎恨的痛苦负担变成了自由和权力的显著增强。我展示了他是如何从叔本华那里得到这个想法的,他自己的尴尬的过去,通过对叔本华执行这个技巧。同样的态度,根据一个人现在的兴趣和关注,重新创造过去的文本,同时释放了一个人现在的文本,让未来的读者强加他们的阅读,就像查拉图斯特拉告诉他的追随者不要跟随他一样。海德格尔以一种比他通常得到的赞誉更为细致入微的方式接受了这一观点,并将其应用于哲学史等领域。所有的哲学家都是这么说的,因为它一直在重复。德里达将其重新创造为可迭代性,解构尼采开始的不/改变二分法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Open Philosophy
Open Philosophy Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
20.00%
发文量
25
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Relational or Object-Oriented? A Dialogue between Two Contemporary Ontologies On the “How” and the “Why”: Nietzsche on Happiness and the Meaningful Life Knowing Holbein’s Objects: An Object-Oriented-Ontology Analysis of The Ambassadors Calling and Responding: An Ethical-Existential Framework for Conceptualising Interactions “in-between” Self and Other Non-Existence: The Nuclear Option
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1