The Refiner's Fire Posted December 2, 2018 Posted December 2, 2018 Hi, I'm new on this forum. I'm from Germany, 26 years old and a relatively recent convert to the church. I study and work in a philosophy department at a German university, specifically in the field of phenomenology (mostly Lévinas, Merleau-Ponty ans Heidegger), proto-ethics, alterity, metaphysics and ontology. Within the church, I am a big fan of the Nauvoo period, because I think there the doctrine was at its peak blossom, far from the beginning and it was before everything went in a lot of directions in Utah. I am glad to join in discussion, mind, I am young, not born into the church and English is not my first language 😉 For this first post I also wanted to bring a discussion topic, concerning Brigham Young's concept of what one might call „intelligence recycling“. What do you think of this concept? What do you think of universal salvation? Does it matter? Should we belief because something is promised to us or is there acutally a different reason why we have faith and obedience? What do you think about the different stances on what will happen to the sons of perdition? Universal Salvation, even in the sense of Universal Exaltation does indeed seem to be an idea in Mormonism through different prophets: Brigham Young 1853: "The Lord said to Jeremiah the Prophet, "Arise, and go down to the potter's house, and there I will cause thee to hear my words. Then I went down to the potter's house, and, behold, he wrought a work on the wheels. And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hands of the potter: so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make it." The clay that marred in the potter's hands was thrown back into the unprepared portion, to be prepared over again. So it will be with every wicked man and woman, and every wicked nation, kingdom, and government upon earth, sooner or later; they will be thrown back to the native element from which they originated, to be worked over again, and be prepared to enjoy some sort of a kingdom." It seems to be debated by various prophets if that is true all the way to exaltation. But that the sons of perdition have to be at least resurrected. Anton H Lund 1904: "Perhaps the sons of perdition are the last class. All will be resurrected. Jesus died for us all. He became the Redeemer, He bought us for a price, and His death brought the privilege of resurrection unto every soul, whether he be a sinner or not. All will receive a share in the resurrection--not in the first resurrection, but they will be resurrected, and will be brought before the bar of our Heavenly Father." Joseph Fielding Smith: "Question: "Will those who in this life become sons of perdition receive their bodies in the resurrection? If so, will they have to pass through death again? If they do not, and their bodies and spirits are again united never to be divided, will they have ascendancy, or jurisdiction, over Satan and those who rebelled with him and who have no bodies of flesh and bones?" Answer: The matter of the resurrection being universal has been discussed in former articles appearing in The Improvement Era. Therefore it is sufficient to say here that the resurrection will be universal and every soul born into this world must receive his body and spirit reunited inseparably in the resurrection." What do you say, fellow saints and everyone else? Brigham Young's idea seems intriguing. Those sons of perdition being so far from God that they turn back into impersonal intelligence then being put into spirit tabernacles again and again until everyone is saved and eventually exalted.
MiserereNobis Posted December 2, 2018 Posted December 2, 2018 Hi and welcome! There are a couple of philosophy minded folk on this board. ClarkGoble and mfbukowski in particular come to mind. I have an undergraduate degree in philosophy but tend to not get into philosophical debate on here. I would suggest getting enough posts (25 I think) so that you can start your own topics on the general discussions area. You'll get more responses there. 2
The Refiner's Fire Posted December 2, 2018 Author Posted December 2, 2018 8 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said: Hi and welcome! There are a couple of philosophy minded folk on this board. ClarkGoble and mfbukowski in particular come to mind. I have an undergraduate degree in philosophy but tend to not get into philosophical debate on here. I would suggest getting enough posts (25 I think) so that you can start your own topics on the general discussions area. You'll get more responses there. Thanks a lot, 🌞 I will try my best with the posts ☺️
Calm Posted December 2, 2018 Posted December 2, 2018 I asked mods to move this over as it seems like an interesting topic, they are often not available over the weekends and they may decide not to move it for other reasons, but if it shows up there, that is why...not because you did anything wrong. 2
mfbukowski Posted December 2, 2018 Posted December 2, 2018 54 minutes ago, The Refiner's Fire said: Hi, I'm new on this forum. I'm from Germany, 26 years old and a relatively recent convert to the church. I study and work in a philosophy department at a German university, specifically in the field of phenomenology (mostly Lévinas, Merleau-Ponty ans Heidegger), proto-ethics, alterity, metaphysics and ontology. Within the church, I am a big fan of the Nauvoo period, because I think there the doctrine was at its peak blossom, far from the beginning and it was before everything went in a lot of directions in Utah. I am glad to join in discussion, mind, I am young, not born into the church and English is not my first language 😉 For this first post I also wanted to bring a discussion topic, concerning Brigham Young's concept of what one might call „intelligence recycling“. What do you think of this concept? What do you think of universal salvation? Does it matter? Should we belief because something is promised to us or is there acutally a different reason why we have faith and obedience? What do you think about the different stances on what will happen to the sons of perdition? Universal Salvation, even in the sense of Universal Exaltation does indeed seem to be an idea in Mormonism through different prophets: Brigham Young 1853: "The Lord said to Jeremiah the Prophet, "Arise, and go down to the potter's house, and there I will cause thee to hear my words. Then I went down to the potter's house, and, behold, he wrought a work on the wheels. And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hands of the potter: so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make it." The clay that marred in the potter's hands was thrown back into the unprepared portion, to be prepared over again. So it will be with every wicked man and woman, and every wicked nation, kingdom, and government upon earth, sooner or later; they will be thrown back to the native element from which they originated, to be worked over again, and be prepared to enjoy some sort of a kingdom." It seems to be debated by various prophets if that is true all the way to exaltation. But that the sons of perdition have to be at least resurrected. Anton H Lund 1904: "Perhaps the sons of perdition are the last class. All will be resurrected. Jesus died for us all. He became the Redeemer, He bought us for a price, and His death brought the privilege of resurrection unto every soul, whether he be a sinner or not. All will receive a share in the resurrection--not in the first resurrection, but they will be resurrected, and will be brought before the bar of our Heavenly Father." Joseph Fielding Smith: "Question: "Will those who in this life become sons of perdition receive their bodies in the resurrection? If so, will they have to pass through death again? If they do not, and their bodies and spirits are again united never to be divided, will they have ascendancy, or jurisdiction, over Satan and those who rebelled with him and who have no bodies of flesh and bones?" Answer: The matter of the resurrection being universal has been discussed in former articles appearing in The Improvement Era. Therefore it is sufficient to say here that the resurrection will be universal and every soul born into this world must receive his body and spirit reunited inseparably in the resurrection." What do you say, fellow saints and everyone else? Brigham Young's idea seems intriguing. Those sons of perdition being so far from God that they turn back into impersonal intelligence then being put into spirit tabernacles again and again until everyone is saved and eventually exalted. Hey- welcome! Great to have you around- I didn't quite finish my Masters after getting into Wittgenstein's later stuff- and I was and am convinced that most philosophical problems are semantic in nature BUT you are certainly in a great position to help out in "Mormon philosophy" being fluent in German and a fan of Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty and the boys! BYU is full of Heideggerians as is Claremont School of Theology's Mormon Studies program. I'm mostly into Pragmatism- Rorty, Dewey, William James and John Dewey which of course is the American/British version of phenomenology, so we are in the same ball park! I think both of these schools are about the only way to account philosophically for religious experience etc I speak a little German and can get along ok with a dictionary for reading- but speaking..... not so much! There is a poster here called "USU 78" who is very into Schopenhauer and he speaks German pretty well as far as I can tell. I will be back to comment on your questions- I don't have time right now, but good to see you here! 2
JLHPROF Posted December 2, 2018 Posted December 2, 2018 3 hours ago, The Refiner's Fire said: Hi, I'm new on this forum. I'm from Germany, 26 years old and a relatively recent convert to the church. I study and work in a philosophy department at a German university, specifically in the field of phenomenology (mostly Lévinas, Merleau-Ponty ans Heidegger), proto-ethics, alterity, metaphysics and ontology. Within the church, I am a big fan of the Nauvoo period, because I think there the doctrine was at its peak blossom, far from the beginning and it was before everything went in a lot of directions in Utah. I am glad to join in discussion, mind, I am young, not born into the church and English is not my first language 😉 For this first post I also wanted to bring a discussion topic, concerning Brigham Young's concept of what one might call „intelligence recycling“. What do you think of this concept? What do you think of universal salvation? Does it matter? Should we belief because something is promised to us or is there acutally a different reason why we have faith and obedience? What do you think about the different stances on what will happen to the sons of perdition? Universal Salvation, even in the sense of Universal Exaltation does indeed seem to be an idea in Mormonism through different prophets: Brigham Young 1853: "The Lord said to Jeremiah the Prophet, "Arise, and go down to the potter's house, and there I will cause thee to hear my words. Then I went down to the potter's house, and, behold, he wrought a work on the wheels. And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hands of the potter: so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make it." The clay that marred in the potter's hands was thrown back into the unprepared portion, to be prepared over again. So it will be with every wicked man and woman, and every wicked nation, kingdom, and government upon earth, sooner or later; they will be thrown back to the native element from which they originated, to be worked over again, and be prepared to enjoy some sort of a kingdom." It seems to be debated by various prophets if that is true all the way to exaltation. But that the sons of perdition have to be at least resurrected. Anton H Lund 1904: "Perhaps the sons of perdition are the last class. All will be resurrected. Jesus died for us all. He became the Redeemer, He bought us for a price, and His death brought the privilege of resurrection unto every soul, whether he be a sinner or not. All will receive a share in the resurrection--not in the first resurrection, but they will be resurrected, and will be brought before the bar of our Heavenly Father." Joseph Fielding Smith: "Question: "Will those who in this life become sons of perdition receive their bodies in the resurrection? If so, will they have to pass through death again? If they do not, and their bodies and spirits are again united never to be divided, will they have ascendancy, or jurisdiction, over Satan and those who rebelled with him and who have no bodies of flesh and bones?" Answer: The matter of the resurrection being universal has been discussed in former articles appearing in The Improvement Era. Therefore it is sufficient to say here that the resurrection will be universal and every soul born into this world must receive his body and spirit reunited inseparably in the resurrection." What do you say, fellow saints and everyone else? Brigham Young's idea seems intriguing. Those sons of perdition being so far from God that they turn back into impersonal intelligence then being put into spirit tabernacles again and again until everyone is saved and eventually exalted. Scripture says God's work and glory is to exalt his children (ie the intelligences). Scripture also says his glory is measured in intelligence. That's not coincidental. And I for one don't believe that progression can ever be permanently halted. But I study LDS doctrine and teachings, not philosophy. 1
Robert F. Smith Posted December 2, 2018 Posted December 2, 2018 4 hours ago, The Refiner's Fire said: ................................. For this first post I also wanted to bring a discussion topic, concerning Brigham Young's concept of what one might call „intelligence recycling“. What do you think of this concept? What do you think of universal salvation? Does it matter? Should we belief because something is promised to us or is there acutally a different reason why we have faith and obedience? What do you think about the different stances on what will happen to the sons of perdition? .................................. "Perhaps the sons of perdition are the last class. All will be resurrected. Jesus died for us all. He became the Redeemer, He bought us for a price, and His death brought the privilege of resurrection unto every soul, whether he be a sinner or not. All will receive a share in the resurrection--not in the first resurrection, but they will be resurrected, and will be brought before the bar of our Heavenly Father." Joseph Fielding Smith: "Question: "Will those who in this life become sons of perdition receive their bodies in the resurrection? If so, will they have to pass through death again? If they do not, and their bodies and spirits are again united never to be divided, will they have ascendancy, or jurisdiction, over Satan and those who rebelled with him and who have no bodies of flesh and bones?" Answer: The matter of the resurrection being universal has been discussed in former articles appearing in The Improvement Era. Therefore it is sufficient to say here that the resurrection will be universal and every soul born into this world must receive his body and spirit reunited inseparably in the resurrection." What do you say, fellow saints and everyone else? Brigham Young's idea seems intriguing. Those sons of perdition being so far from God that they turn back into impersonal intelligence then being put into spirit tabernacles again and again until everyone is saved and eventually exalted. Mormon karma and reincarnation?? The Kabbalistic idea of gilgul, and the Eastern notion of progressive transmigration and rebirth (samsara) of the eternal spark of life (intelligence, entelechy, jiva, atman) could not be applied to the resurrected in normative Mormonism, just because (as Lund says) the resurrection is universal and everyone is an inseparably connected body-spirit-intelligence. Even if some sort of refiner's fire were applied to the few sons of perdition, it could only purify them. As for that third of the host of heaven which followed Lucifer, which are to be cast into outer darkness, it may be that their eternal intelligence cannot be separated from their spiritual tabernacle -- in which case they suffer in outer darkness forever. That is my take on it, and of course I could be wrong. The mysteries are controversial at best, and beyond comprehension at worst. The rabbis have always advised us to avoid them. 2
Popular Post Maidservant Posted December 2, 2018 Popular Post Posted December 2, 2018 (edited) The thing is that in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, there is no 'heaven' in the sectarian sense. Even the device of the telestial-terrestrial-celestial is a description of the condition of our bodies--rather, indeed, ourselves and what we become, or are, at any given moment in time and/or eternity. Our destiny is that same sociality that now exists, but coupled with eternal glory--or, as I imagine, peace beyond understanding. In my opinion, the condition of "perdition" is contemplated far out of balance to the effect it actually has in the universe. While there may indeed be a condition within an endless universe that may be termed 'perdition', there are, what, five people total out of gazillions of us (in eternity) who would ever even be eligible for that. So we are talking about the destiny of five people. Those five people absolutely know what they are getting into, because you can't head to perdition without full knowledge, because anyone with less than full knowledge could not be eligible or defined by perdition (and therefore always eligible for redemption, if not in time, then in eternity, after learning what they need to, to receive that redemption). Joseph Smith said that even after we die, it will take a long time to learn our exaltation. I personally imagine that our learning will be much like it is now--in worlds. While obviously Brigham Young had the idea and said it out loud, I do have a hard time thinking that anyone's destiny is dissolution or could be. As we are all co-eternal with God, at one level at least--neither created nor can be (neither destroyed, nor can be). BUT I do think that, in worlds, we often seem to take steps backwards, in comparison with our true nature as children of God, in order to participate in more limited worlds for the purpose of gaining knowledge and glory. Or perhaps for purposes of rehabilitation, if there is is a lot of blood and oppression on our soul from previous worlds. Edited December 3, 2018 by Maidservant 5
The Nehor Posted December 2, 2018 Posted December 2, 2018 There is a theory that resurrected Perditionites will be resurrected and degraded back into native spirit matter (or whatever that is) to start over. I heard that Brigham Young and John Taylor both put this forward. I doubt it. The scriptures say that while the Lord has shown many Perdition they get only a glimpse and that no one knows the end of that state except those who experience it. 2
The Refiner's Fire Posted December 2, 2018 Author Posted December 2, 2018 Thanks a lot for all your kind welcomes and answers! 🌞 Cool to see that there are more people out here interested in philosophy. I am entirely unfamiliar with Pragmatism, I only overheard the term once or twice. Wittgenstein, I have some experience with but even though genius I did not find a way I was able to apply it within my own theory. Concerning "intelligence recycling", I find it especially appealing because it means the definite end of those who were cast out of heaven and those who committed the unpardonable sin while still showing God's power to one day be victorious over evil, sin and the primordial element as a whole.
Jeanne Posted December 2, 2018 Posted December 2, 2018 Hi and welcome!! For english being a second language for you...you are very good!!! You will be an asset to all of the members on this board. Happy to have you here!! 1
The Refiner's Fire Posted December 2, 2018 Author Posted December 2, 2018 5 minutes ago, Jeanne said: Hi and welcome!! For english being a second language for you...you are very good!!! You will be an asset to all of the members on this board. Happy to have you here!! Thanks a lot! 😄
Robert F. Smith Posted December 2, 2018 Posted December 2, 2018 28 minutes ago, The Refiner's Fire said: .................................... I only overheard the term once or twice. Wittgenstein, I have some experience with but even though genius I did not find a way I was able to apply it within my own theory................................ One thing I like about Wittgenstein is his insistence that words mean what they are used to mean, and that formal definitions may not always apply. Second is his notion that one cannot use philosophy to reach certain conclusions -- for example, he used philosophy to reject its use. That is, he climbed into a loft with his philosophical ladder, then kicked away the ladder, declaring it useless nonsense. Language has severe limitations. 1
Jeanne Posted December 2, 2018 Posted December 2, 2018 3 hours ago, The Refiner's Fire said: Thanks a lot! 😄 I have to ask you...my stepmother who I loved dearly, was born and raised in Germany. No one could do Christmas like she could. I miss her candles on the Christmas tree this year...do all of you use candles on trees??
The Refiner's Fire Posted December 2, 2018 Author Posted December 2, 2018 25 minutes ago, Jeanne said: I have to ask you...my stepmother who I loved dearly, was born and raised in Germany. No one could do Christmas like she could. I miss her candles on the Christmas tree this year...do all of you use candles on trees?? Most people use electric lights, but some still use real candles, like my parents ☺️ We have always had a real Christmas tree with real candles.
Stargazer Posted December 2, 2018 Posted December 2, 2018 Welcome to the forum! Your English is much better than my German. But let me give this a try: Einige Poster hier haben als Missionare in Deutschland gedient. Das schliesst mich ein. Ich kann aber besser lesen und hoeren als schreiben und sprechen. Das mag offentsichlich sein! Ich habe in der Zentraldeutschen Mission gedient (spaeter war es als Deutschland Duesseldorf Mission umgennant) , von 1972 bis 1974, mit dem Praesidenten Rudolf K. Poecker. 1
Jeanne Posted December 3, 2018 Posted December 3, 2018 2 hours ago, The Refiner's Fire said: Most people use electric lights, but some still use real candles, like my parents ☺️ We have always had a real Christmas tree with real candles. Thanks for the info. I had never seen that in my early years and it is beautiful!!
mfbukowski Posted December 3, 2018 Posted December 3, 2018 8 hours ago, The Refiner's Fire said: Thanks a lot for all your kind welcomes and answers! 🌞 Cool to see that there are more people out here interested in philosophy. I am entirely unfamiliar with Pragmatism, I only overheard the term once or twice. Wittgenstein, I have some experience with but even though genius I did not find a way I was able to apply it within my own theory. Concerning "intelligence recycling", I find it especially appealing because it means the definite end of those who were cast out of heaven and those who committed the unpardonable sin while still showing God's power to one day be victorious over evil, sin and the primordial element as a whole. The reincarnation thing is interesting because on one hand we have as official doctrine no reincarnation. On the other hand we have the idea that Jesus did only what he saw Father do. Does that mean that Father was once a savior somewhere, some "time"?? If not how did the savior learn how to do that? And there is some implication in the temple that Father plaid the "role" of Adam, in bringing about a fall, so who knows! Re pragmatism, , read the quote from a philosopher named "Rorty" below this post and see if it makes sense to you. Rorty is a Pragmatist and there is an affinity there with Heidegger. the main objective of pragmatism is to do away with the appearance /reality distinction. In other words all we can know is the perceptions of our senses, and nothing beyond our senses, only the world as it presents itself phenomenally. Similar to Dasein in the world.
Stargazer Posted December 3, 2018 Posted December 3, 2018 11 hours ago, mfbukowski said: The reincarnation thing is interesting because on one hand we have as official doctrine no reincarnation. No reincarnation, as such, but some have speculated (and I have dabbled in it a bit) that there may be multiple mortal probations. I've thought that one mortal experience might not be enough for Father to prove us, and that we might need to be more thoroughly tested. And we need not know anything about it, because each probation would be totally isolated from the other. 11 hours ago, mfbukowski said: On the other hand we have the idea that Jesus did only what he saw Father do. Does that mean that Father was once a savior somewhere, some "time"?? If not how did the savior learn how to do that? And there is some implication in the temple that Father plaid the "role" of Adam, in bringing about a fall, so who knows! Re pragmatism, , read the quote from a philosopher named "Rorty" below this post and see if it makes sense to you. Rorty is a Pragmatist and there is an affinity there with Heidegger. the main objective of pragmatism is to do away with the appearance /reality distinction. In other words all we can know is the perceptions of our senses, and nothing beyond our senses, only the world as it presents itself phenomenally. A perfect testing scenario! 11 hours ago, mfbukowski said: Similar to Dasein in the world. I am amused that Dasein (a German-language concept) literally means "being there," "to be there," or "be there" in English. Reminds me of a certain movie starring Peter Sellers. 1
mfbukowski Posted December 3, 2018 Posted December 3, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, Stargazer said: No reincarnation, as such, but some have speculated (and I have dabbled in it a bit) that there may be multiple mortal probations. I've thought that one mortal experience might not be enough for Father to prove us, and that we might need to be more thoroughly tested. And we need not know anything about it, because each probation would be totally isolated from the other. A perfect testing scenario! I am amused that Dasein (a German-language concept) literally means "being there," "to be there," or "be there" in English. Reminds me of a certain movie starring Peter Sellers. Yes and there is a reason for that! The idea was just then becoming popular, ie, reaching the public. And then there is "The Fool on the Hill"... and many others, "Babba Ram Dass(ein) "Be Here Now" etc. The strength this idea is to Mormonism is that if all we can know is phenomena as we perceive them then visions and religious experience are real at least as any phenomena, at least for ourselves in finding the meaning and significance of our personal lives. Edited December 3, 2018 by mfbukowski
nuclearfuels Posted December 3, 2018 Posted December 3, 2018 On 12/1/2018 at 7:54 PM, The Refiner's Fire said: So it will be with every wicked man and woman, and every wicked nation, kingdom, and government upon earth, sooner or later; they will be thrown back to the native element from which they originated, to be worked over again, and be prepared to enjoy some sort of a kingdom." Welcome! I'm not a big philosophizer but here's my take on it: I believe Brother Brigham is referring to: 1 - The time the wicked men and women will spend in the Spirit World, learning, progressing after being returned to the native element (Spirit bodies, an evolved Intelligence) 2 - the temporal materials that were used to build up the wicked nations, kingdoms and governments - the buildings, houses, structures, roads, etc. Reminds me of the cities destroyed in the Book of Mormon and the destruction Joshua was commanded to reign down, after Moses' time; as well as the Central American cultures who built cities literally on top of prior ruins, sometimes 7 times, like 7 buildings/temples built on top of prior temples
nuclearfuels Posted December 3, 2018 Posted December 3, 2018 4 hours ago, Stargazer said: 16 hours ago, mfbukowski said: The reincarnation thing is interesting because on one hand we have as official doctrine no reincarnation. No reincarnation, as such, but some have speculated (and I have dabbled in it a bit) that there may be multiple mortal probations. I've thought that one mortal experience might not be enough for Father to prove us, and that we might need to be more thoroughly tested. And we need not know anything about it, because each probation would be totally isolated from the other. True, and awesome response! No formal reincarnation, as our memory and intelligence continues with us however...I imagine the Savior who created this earth out of existing material likely visited, in His Spirit body, every world His hands helped create. Each visit does not equal reincarnation but...each visit / cycle of creation seems to demonstrate the salient slivers of truth formal reincarnation aspires to, meaning that Adam and Eve's children who diluted the true doctrine of eternal progression still got more correct than traditional Christianity and the Bible.
The Nehor Posted December 3, 2018 Posted December 3, 2018 I agree with the eastern religions. Reincarnation sounds awful. I have lived a life of relative privilege and ease and I have no desire to come back and do it again. This world is not kind enough to make me yearn to stay in it or return to it. Reminds me of my exit interview for my Mission. I was asked if I had the option if I would go another two years. I said no. My President looked at me and agreed that he would not have in his two year youth mission either. His comment that going in ignorant is fine and you can enjoy it but going in with a full knowledge of what you are likely to face would make it much harder to do it again. Of course not liking it does not make it false. I hate a lot of things that are reality and have to accept that. I just see no evidence to believe it and even less of a reason to hope for it to be true. Maybe my mind will change on my deathbed if I botch this whole mortality thing.
mfbukowski Posted December 3, 2018 Posted December 3, 2018 (edited) It's interesting that Nietzsche has a notion called "Eternal Recurrance" which is a sort of criterion for a true Ubermensch, that he could affirm his life, knowing all the pain, failures and joy exactly as it was, and will that it could be lived again and again forever, just as it was. I see that as the ultimate understanding of "Opposition in all Things." If one can affirm one's life in that manner one has heaven on Earth right now. You have lived it https://youtu.be/EknD3KRtgDk Preview YouTube video Nietzsche's Eternal Recurrence Nietzsche's Eternal Recurrence Edited December 3, 2018 by mfbukowski
mfbukowski Posted December 3, 2018 Posted December 3, 2018 2 hours ago, mfbukowski said: It's interesting that Nietzsche has a notion called "Eternal Recurrance" which is a sort of criterion for a true Ubermensch, that he could affirm his life, knowing all the pain, failures and joy exactly as it was, and will that it could be lived again and again forever, just as it was. I see that as the ultimate understanding of "Opposition in all Things." If one can affirm one's life in that manner one has heaven on Earth right now. You have lived it https://youtu.be/EknD3KRtgDk Preview YouTube video Nietzsche's Eternal Recurrence Nietzsche's Eternal Recurrence Just to clarify, Nietzsche's point is independent of morals. The character in the film affirms "freedom" and leaves his wife. One could just as easily go the other way and affirm his covenants. The point is to affirm your life, good and bad, he might just as well have affirmed his covenants and his sacrifices towards repentance.
Recommended Posts