|
Abstract: Nietzsche’s doctrine of eternal return has often confounded philosophers. The doctrine is so puzzling that most commentators on the doctrine never get to the question of whether the doctrine might be true, for they can never get over the hurdle of attempting to find out what the doctrine means. Professor Reeves is interested in two perspectives from which Nietzsche’s doctrine of eternal recurrence can be evaluated in terms of meaningfulness: logical meaningfulness and moral meaningfulness. These two approaches are intimately related. While Professor Reeves emphasizes the metaphysical issues, this article emphasizes the moral issues, bringing balance to the overall discussion. It concludes that the moral approach is not necessarily axiologically meaningless.
|