Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Which was in turn strongly informed by the Epicurean version by way of Lucretius.

Both of which really fail to think through the concept in light of their views of continued evolution.

If humanity is but a stepping stone to something greater, then the initial events would predate its emergence but the recurrence would postdate its existence.

So the rejection of divine involvement or role in our existence based on the premise of natural origins is no longer as persuasive in a paradigm where God can end up being the product of continued evolution past the point of humanity (an uber-Übermensch), then preceding the recurrence of past events.

More concretely using modern technical parallels - even if humanity develops from natural origins, our ability to recreate or simulate versions of ourselves from the past in recurring events need not fit the identical constraints of our initial conditions by virtue of our progress from them.

Nietzsche had the right ingredients with the broad concept of the ubermensch and eternal recurrence, but his mixing of them leaves a lot to be desired.



Late reply, thanks for good points, esp. the position of Lucretius in bridging the Greeks. I imagine Nietzsche unable to recognise a total contradiction in his philosophy as problematic, but rather saying "I'm all too human too" :) respects




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: