The Doctrine of Eternal Recurrence Comes Back Again...

By Matt Pike

Abstract:

Traditional examinations of  Friedrich Nietzsche's philosophy differ over the meaning of his doctrine of Eternal Recurrence. For further clarification of this issue, an analysis was conducted consisting of separate consideration of the doctrine as both a metaphysical claim about the temporal structure of the universe and as a personal psychological utility to be employed by individuals. Includes cited evidence for, as well as projected ramifications of, the doctrine's acceptance.  It is hoped that this paper will lead to additional understanding of the concept of the Eternal Recurrence in the philosophical community.

            Throughout history, answers have been sought to fundamental questions about what it means to exist in the universe. For every answer found, however, two new questions arise.  Nowhere is this more true than in the study of the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche, and even more particularly, in his Doctrine of the Eternal Recurrence. Aphorism 341 in The Gay Science is one of the first occurrences of the Doctrine, and is thus one of the best place to begin trying to make sense of this complex idea. Nietzsche's varied use of the concept, especially in latter works, indicates the possibility of interpreting the doctrine in two different ways. The first possibility is that, if Nietzsche is correct, time somehow repeats itself in the reality that is the universe. The second way that Nietzsche may have intended this is as a philosophical outlook or psychological tool to be used by individuals in their lives. It is unclear exactly how Nietzsche intended this concept to be understood, so an examination of the two different possibilities is required to gain a better understanding of the Doctrine of the Eternal Recurrence.

            The first possibility is that Nietzsche was making an actual claim about the metaphysical nature of the universe in regards to its temporal structure. This conception of the Eternal Recurrence suggests that time is actually a circular phenomenon that repeats itself after a fixed period has past.  This is a drastic claim that is not readily supportable by human everyday experience, and thus is difficult to assert with any strength or certainty. It is important to note, however, that even though everyday experience does not directly support this conception of time, there is nothing that contradicts it either. Our rational consciousness experiences the passing of time as a linear progression of events that can only happen in a fixed way because of the relationship of cause and effect. We perceive that anything that occurs has a full and adequate cause in the "past" which brings about the current effect. ^[1] The perception of this causal-chain is why the consciousness formulates a linear conception of time. Because human experience takes place within the framework of time, however, humans are afforded only a partial perception of what is actually occurring, and so the outside, objective structure may in fact be something entirely different, while maintaining a linear appearance to us. This shows that time may indeed function differently then it appears, but the question remains of how Nietzsche is proposing that it functions.

            In analyzing the Doctrine of the Eternal Recurrence as a temporal structure, one of Nietzsche's passages that stands out is where the demon decrees, "The eternal hourglass of existence is turned upside down again and again, and you with it, speck of dust!".  There are several different ways to interpret this. The first possibility is that time does progress as an objective, and comprehensive, line which originates at a fixed point and ends at another fixed point, then loops itself over again. This would require some external force or power to be responsible for the assigning  of  each start and end point, such as a god or other deity, or perhaps even the "Cartesian demon". This power would then assign a "beginning" of time, and an "end" of time, and everything in between would be the content of the experiential timeline or "hourglass" that would then repeat once the end was reached. Nietzsche's general stance on gods and other external forces, however, would seem to suggest that this is not the conception that he had in mind. Indeed, one of the advantages that Nietzsche finds in the doctrine is that it removes the need for an Aristotelian "unmoved mover" to create a beginning of time. 

            The next set of possibilities includes a certain degree of subjectivity. For example, it is conceivable that the time line depends upon a human consciousness to experience it in order for it to operate. This would mean that time is simply a phenomena experienced within the mind of a human, and thus a logical "loop point" would be for time to progress from someone's birth to their death and then begin again. This would be a logical possibility, but according to section 341 in The Gay Science, Nietzsche labels the arbitrary moment of the demons arrival as the end loop point. For all purposes, however, this moment would function as the persons "death" because it would be the moment from which no new experiencing would occur. Once this point is reached, the subject would then begin experiencing everything again from their birth in the same order, or in other words, begin their life over again. It would make sense in this framework for everything to repeat itself in exactly the same way because every choice or action that the person made in her life was motivated in close connection to the external occurrences in the world. If the exact same conditions are in place, as they presumably would be, then the subject will take the same actions again every time.

            The one thing that might interfere with this exact reoccurrence would be if the subject maintained knowledge of her previous "trip" through the time line. If the subject was aware of what happened as a result of each action and had the ability to make a different choice upon its repetition, it would seem likely that she would attempt to make changes for the sake of "improving" her experience of life. Given the complex and chaotic nature of the universe, a very small change at one stage in a system will have exponential effects farther along in the system. 

            For the purposes of the Eternal Recurrence as a metaphysical structure of time, however, this cannot be the case because, as Nietzsche specifies, "There will be nothing new in it...and everything...in your life will have to return to you, all in the same succession and sequence." (341, The Gay Science) Nietzsche further explains this in Thus Spoke Zarathustra when he says, "The will cannot will backwards; and that he cannot break time and time's covetousness, that is the will's loneliest melancholy." (p. 251, The Portable Nietzsche) If the subject maintained knowledge of her experience and were able to change things upon repeating her life, things would not progress in the same manner and thus would not be reoccurring, which contradicts the very idea of the doctrine.

            Another problem encountered in this particular view is whether time can only exist for one person in the entire universe. Again, there are two different possibilities, one is that there truly is only one person in the universe, which any one person can hypothesize about oneself. If one considers the possibility that this entire "reality" is simply one's dream, then there is no problem with a conception of time consisting entirely of one's own experiences, and thus repeating only for the self. ^[2] If, however, there truly are multiple conscious entities in the universe, the idea of the Eternal Recurrence requires a breaking away from the traditional conception of time as a linear, four-dimensional matrix. As the time line progresses there must be points, namely where each subjects recurrence occurs, where a new time line breaks off from the ongoing time line and loops back on itself. Please see figure 1.1 below for an illustration of this possible time line.

                                                                        Figure 1.1

The time line progresses, but loops back on itself for each subject.

            While this may seem outlandish, modern physicists have been formulating theories that would accommodate a time line as illustrated above. Albert Einstein's groundbreaking work with Relativity showed that time as a straight, consistent linear concept is insufficient to support what actually occurs in the universe, and Stephen Hawking's A Brief History of Time served to revolutionize humanities understanding of the universe and its temporal structure. These works laid the foundation for a more innovative formulating of temporal theories. Julian Barbour proposes a conception of time as a collection of eternal instants that are perceived by consciousness as a linear progression from one moment to the next in his book The End of Time. Under this conception, every moment of time is, in itself, an eternal and existent universe that people's consciousness' "visit" one at a time. Under this framework, every conceivable moment would eternally exist and could easily be revisited by one consciousness at a latter point in that subject's experiencing of time. This would make it possible for multiple subjects to return and re-experience the linear progression of their experiences, independent of each other, without any effect on the overall temporal matrix of the universe.

            These temporal theories draw heavily on modern scientific movements such as quantum mechanics and astrophysics, which where not developed until long after Nietzsche's death, but appear to offer the best and strongest conception of the Doctrine of the Eternal Recurrence as a structure of time. Whether Nietzsche had a conception of the universe similar to this far in advance of the modern movement is not discernible, but given his groundbreaking thought in many other areas, would seem to be a possibility. Even with this possibility in mind, making the Doctrine internally consistent as a temporal structure requires a tremendous amount of speculating about and "restructuring" the physical universe. These speculations may be true in actuality, and indeed, there is increasing evidence for such an abstract view of time, but the other possible interpretation of Nietzsche's meaning behind the doctrine, as a "test" or psychological decision-making mechanism, requires less accommodation to function.

            The possibility that Nietzsche intended the Doctrine of Eternal Recurrence to function purely as a mental apparatus for use by humans, and especially by the overmen, appears to be the most accurate interpretation of aphorism 341. Within the framework of Nietzsche's philosophy, there are numerous advantages to one's adopting the doctrine as an internal perceiving of the world and of oneself. In usual Nietzschean form though, these advantages do not come without a price. The title of aphorism 341, The Greatest Weight, or Greatest Stress, suggests that the Eternal Recurrence is the single most profound obstacle that one has to overcome, or at least deal with, to live well. Nietzsche's tone makes it clear that it is a sure sign of weakness to be one of the ones who "throw themselves down and gnash their teeth". Presumably, these people are generally the individuals and groups that Nietzsche attacks in his various works. His repeated attacks on Christianity as failing to treat this life as an end in itself would suggest that he views the possessors of beliefs in an afterlife as individuals who would "throw themselves down" if they learned that all of their "moral inhibiting" amounted to nothing other then lost chances and a boring life that they are doomed to repeat.

            Many people believe that in order for life to be worth living, there must be an overarching purpose to existence, and thus, according to Nietzsche, form illusions for the sake of their comfort. By believing in a morality, God, or other higher cause, people get to live their dream that there is ultimate justification for everything. This serves to allow the imposition of an illusion so that one does not have to view the "truth" of the universe. One of these "truths" that Nietzsche proposes people deny is the "death of God". Nietzsche's statement that "God is dead" is intended to imply that there is a more accurate manner of existing now than following traditional doctrine dogmatically simply because it is tradition. Nietzsche believes that the time has passed when mankind "needed" the conception of God and the accompanying moralities, and that a new existence is coming into being. This new way of life is in accords with what he terms the way of the overman, who has no need of a god, and lives life fully, strongly, and without appealing to outside notions. With God's death, Nietzsche proposes that "we must become gods ourselves" in order to be "worthy of this greatest of all deeds". (Aphorism 125, Gay Science) This serves to demand a transformation of the self to be a more powerful, more aware, and more active participant in life, which the Doctrine of Eternal Recurrence is designed to help achieve and maintain. Nietzsche says that with the death of God, a new sea of possibility has opened before us. This rests on the observation that there have always been many options that man would not let himself consider or experience, and with the removal of the conception of God, these options are now possible. Additionally, each of these options begets new experiences and new growth, and thus new possibilities. Nietzsche heralds the death of God as the most profound event that has ever occurred, and once we fully actualize the ramifications of this "highest" of events, a massive exponential growth of possibility and experience will become mans "playground".

            Nietzsche accuses the traditions of both Platonism and Christianity as failing to embrace life as a thing of beauty in its own right. Both believe something is misunderstood, incomplete, or wrong in this reality and therefore view things in a negative light. Socrates is claimed to have said on his death-bed that he "owes the Gods a sacrifice for curing him of life.' One has to ask what good this kind of a view is to whoever holds it. Obviously, everyone who is alive has to endure life up until the time that death occurs, so given its inevitability, one has a choice to either hate and resent every moment of it, or one can chose to embrace all it is and all it is not as equally beautiful. It is this path that the Doctrine of Eternal Recurrence steers us towards.

            The Eternal Recurrence would be viewed as a wonderful thing by someone who had adopted Nietzsche's philosophy and were progressing towards the state of the overman. This type of person would have taken on a certain characteristic view of life, which Nietzsche repeatedly advocates as being the "way of the strong". This view accepts that this world is not in accordance with an eternal, higher perfection, and does not judge this as a bad thing. Nietzsche proposes that no action can be objectively judged as being better than another, as illustrated in Beyond Good and Evil. It is an acceptance of the way things are, and through this, an empowerment. Along these lines, the restraining of impulses in the name of a higher truth is unsound.

            The "strong" man recognizes the changing and indeterminate nature of all things, and lives accordingly. He indulges himself in his desires, passions, and impulses without question, choosing to live life to its fullest instead of restraining and assuming there will eventually be a pay off. In this manner, the boundaries between "what is" and "what should be" fall away for him. This leads to an "intoxication" of the individual with life itself. ^[3] This intoxication is best understood by the acknowledgment of the aesthetic view that every experience and moment in time is a work of art in itself, and is thus self-justifying. Through an aesthetic appreciation of the world, the viewer finds sufficient "meaning" in everything without having to appeal to a higher cause or end result. Because of this, it is easy to see Nietzsche's view that pain in life is beautiful as well as pleasure. Instead of viewing only certain things that happen to be in alignment with the perceived higher order as good or beautiful, Nietzsche advocates that everything that comes to pass is complete, and beautiful in itself. This is the same view Nietzsche has on life in general, claiming that one should just accept life for what it is and enjoy its subtle nuances and changes in their entirety, without getting distracted by searching for a higher purpose to which everything must conform. With this view truly internalized, an individual would "jump in joy" at being told that she would eternally be repeating everything in her life.

            It now becomes apparent that Nietzsche's Doctrine of the Eternal Recurrence can be employed by an individual at various points in one's life to ascertain how closely one has been following the path of true strength. The path of the overman  is a difficult one, and thus it is easy for someone to lose sight of what is going on in their complex interactions with the external world. It is very plausible for someone to be living her life believing that she is truly "seizing the moment" and enjoying what life has to offer, but then find that, upon reflecting on the Eternal Return, she would most likely "gnash her teeth" in despair at learning that she will be eternally repeating her life.

            In this manner, the Eternal Recurrence can be used as a tool to analyze the past, and if this analysis returns a "favorable" result, it serves to redeem the past by imposing a positive, "aesthetic" evaluation, which Nietzsche maintains is the only way value can truthfully be assigned. If the analysis returns a negative result, this would imply that there are lessons to be learned, and is an indication to the individual that they need to make adjustments in their manner of perceiving things.

            Perhaps more usefully, however, the Doctrine offers the user a helpful decision-making apparatus. With the "sea of possibilities" open to mankind in everyday choices, it serves a beneficial role to analyze every choice that one confronts from the perspective of selecting the alternative that would best be repeated eternally. "The question in each and every thing, "Do you desire this once more and innumerable times more?' would lie upon your actions as the greatest weight.", Nietzsche says. If someone constantly performed this questioning, the only alternative to despair would be to become "well disposed to yourself and to life, to crave nothing more fervently than this ultimate eternal confirmation and seal." (Aphorism 341, Gay Science) This questioning then makes the Doctrine forward reaching since someone in this mindset would make it a point to enjoy himself and his life more, and will therefore get more out of it. If an individual operates in this mindset, even if the actual Eternal Recurrence does not occur, they will still have lived life as fully as is possible.

            If a reconciliation of the many possible meanings of the Eternal Recurrence is to be reached, it must be noted that Nietzsche is forced to employ words and concepts such as truth or correctness for the purpose of conveying his message, but yet, these are exactly the concepts that he wants to move beyond. Before the Eternal Recurrence can be understood and appreciated, the "will to truth" must be overcome, and mankind must move beyond its narrow confines. Scholars find themselves debating the true intentions of Nietzsche in suggesting the concept of the eternal return, but in doing this, they are in fact succumbing to the will to truth, obsessing over what is the one "true" truth. Nietzsche repeatedly asserts that any self-overcoming will include an overcoming of the will to truth. This is possible to do with the Doctrine of Eternal Recurrence once one recognizes that they are actually separate "truths" and one does not have to be correct and the other false.

            The doctrine functions as a psychological apparatus to aid people in their living "well" while they are still alive. In this manner, the act of believing assigns a value of truth to it, and allows it to function truthfully or "well" for the individual employing it. The truth of the metaphysical claim does not matter in the slightest while one still lives. Its truth only becomes an issue if, or when, the "end" is reached and takes hold of the individual.  If this is the case, there is nothing that the individual can do to change things, because if it is the fundamental structure of the temporal universe, it will not care in the slightest whether someone accepted it as true during their lives or not. Thus it becomes apparent that the Eternal Return as a mental apparatus functions independently of its truth as a metaphysical structure, while the temporal nature of the universe, whatever it may be, already is what it is regardless of whether all individuals wish it or not. Perhaps, if the Doctrine of Eternal Recurrence takes hold of all of humanity, all problems will be solved, and the frontiers of human potential expanded. But if not, there's always next time...

                                                Bibliography

Barbour, Julian. The End of Time: The Next Revolution in Physics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Einstein, Albert. Relativity: The Special and the General Theory. New York: Three Rivers Press, 1961.

Hawking, Stephen. A Brief History of Time: From the Big Bang to Black Holes. New York: Bantam Publishing, 1988.

Nietzsche, Friedrich. Basic Writings of Nietzsche. Translated by Walter Kaufmann. New York: Random House, 2000.

Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Gay Science. Translated by Walter Kaufmann. New York: Random House, 1974.

Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Portable Nietzsche. Translated by Walter Kaufmann. New York: Penguin Books, 1976.

Pike, Matthew. Why Descartes is a Jackass. Denver: No One Yet Publishing, Inc., 2001.