In The eternal return as crucial test Eric Oger explores varying interpretations of Friedrich Nietzsche’s “Eternal Return”. He narrows his analysis to two main interpretations one cosmological, and one ethical, following this he argues for an original interpretation that portrays eternal return as a “critical test”. This essay will examine the three interpretations and evaluate the validity of Oger’s criticisms. Cosmological The cosmological interpretation of eternal return argues that Nietzsche was making a metaphysical claim. However, the ambiguity of Nietzsche’s writing becomes problematic when systematizing the idea, since that system will contain the same uncertainty found in his ambiguous writing. Oger presents a metaphysical system that is as follows: eternal return really does happen, this life just as it now is, has been, and will be, will repeat itself, and has repeated itself an infinite number of times exactly in this way. In this system time is cyclic and all action is strictly determined by cause and effect relationships. Oger simplifies this by outlining …show more content…
This means that time has been and will keep repeating itself in this way, but it also rejects the notion of a creation or beginning. Though there could be a monumental event such as the “big bang”, in the cycle, this is not a true beginning. Any moment in this infinite cycle is an equally valid beginning or end, consequently, the terms are meaningless in this system. Theorem number two is that force is finite. Since this system is fixed by infinite, identical repetition, there are a finite number of events that can occur. An absence of this principle would result in a system that would lack the cyclic nature Nietzsche describes. If force was infinite time would have a linear shape extending infinitely in both directions. Oger uses this against Nietzsche citing what he believes to be a critical error that arises with Nietzsche’s “will to