Search

In Ecce Homo, Nietzsche states that the basic conception of Thus spoke Zarathustra consists in «the idea of eternal recurrence, the highest formula of affirmation that can possibly be attained». Taking as a point of departure the analysis of the different parts of this book, first of all we intend to define the place of the thought of eternal recurrence. Establishing the relation of this thought with the notion of overman, the concept of will to power, the project of transvaluation of the values, and the idea of amor fati, we plan to examine the way Nietzsche conceives it in Thus spoke Zarathustra. Then we aim at evaluating to which extent the thought of eternal recurrence consists in the highest acceptation of the world as it is. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To understand Nietzsche's Thus spoke Zarathustra, a work that is not born in a unitary manner, it is necessary to explain how it was conceived and the special circumstances surrounding it, with all their motivations. This book does not imply a drastic disruption in relation to previous works. Nietzsche places this work at the centre of all his writings. This paper presents the chronology of the publication of the four parts of the book, its conceptual and biographical context, and the details of this unique work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The analysis of the manuscripts written by Nietzsche in Sils-Maria in the summer of 1881 gives us some precious clues concerning the genesis of Thus Spoke Zarathustra: about the relationship between Zarathustra and eternal recurrence, about the parodic nature of the figure of the Persian sage, and about the strong connection which ties Zarathustra and the philosophy and literature of Nietzsche's time. Under the magnifying glass of the philologist and through the prism of the Nietzsche's personal library and readings, what seemed serious and archaic becomes parodic and modern. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the current essay on Friedrich Nietzsche, we tried to disprove a prejudice and to present our own hypothesis. The Prejudice would be that Nietzsche is held responsible of what we call "the death of God". Yet, what we support is that our philosopher ascertains a weakness of Christianity and a growing secularization of Western civilization. Nietzsche is not the "murderer" of God, but only the doctor who gives the diagnosis that God is death within our hearts. Then, the hypothesis which we support with arguments is that Nietzsche's Super-man is not Christian's God successor but more a product of the Christian culture itself. For this purpose, we suggest to read again the main works of the philosopher, considered in terms of their value judgments on Christianity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]