Da interpretação do eterno retorno do mesmo de Nietzsche como antidoutrina

• Autor(a) principal: Vedovato, Hugo José De Carvalho [UNIFESP]
• Data de Publicação: 2021
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
• dARK ID: ark:/48912/001300000xb6x
• Texto Completo: https://sucupira.capes.gov.br/sucupira/public/consultas/coleta/trabalhoConclusao/viewTrabalhoConclusao.jsf?popup=true&id_trabalho=10028698; https://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/68250
• topic: Nietzsche; Eternal Recurrence; Anti-Doctrine; Stegmaier; Nietzsche; Eterno Retorno; Antidoutrina; Stegmaier

Werner Stegmaier’s proposed interpretation of Nietzsche’s thought of eternal recurrence of the same as anti-doctrine is debated here. Though clearly viable, limiting the role of the thought of eternal recurrence to be such, there’s a risk of weakening that which seems to be its most pressing feature: the question concerning the reaction to the prospect of the eternal repetition of existence such as it has been experienced, diminishing the potency of what Nietzsche saw as most terrifying, most weighing, but also most proficuous in it. Furthermore, it is possible to understand the thought of recurrence as anti-doctrine, and harvest the fruits of it, amongst which the critique to metaphysics, so dear to Stegmaier, without the need of any paradoxalizing deadlock seen by him – deadlocks which, besides deviating the focus from its question, block that which it brings beyond the critique of metaphysics, as an attempt unshackled from the restraining concern with metaphysics, with the dynamics set by it and with the necessity of opposing it and this dynamic. In putting all of the celebrated Nietzschean concepts aligned as anti-doctrines, and having the same final goals in so being, there’s a risk of equating them, going against what is preached by the philosophy of which they are part. Saying they also go through this concern, that they also serve this purpose seems accurate – especially in a philosophy warning itself to be paved by this concern, this demolition of certainties being its first level, suspicions its entrance door. Caution is advised, however, so that, eager to bring out this quality of it, which is found in each of its commas, we do not limit its reach to that, neither its capability of descrying beyond that.