Changes

====3.5.4.  Recapitulation — Da Capo, Al Segno====

====3.5.4.  Recapitulation — Da Capo, Al Segno====

He who, prompted by some enigmatic desire, has, like me, long endeavored to think pessimism through to the bottom and to redeem it from the half-Christian, half-German simplicity and narrowness with which it finally presented itself to this century, namely in the form of the Schopenhaueran philosophy;  he who has really gazed with an Asiatic and more than Asiatic eye down into the most world-denying of all possible modes of thought — beyond good and evil and no longer, like Buddha and Schopenhauer, under the spell and illusion of morality — perhaps by that very act, and without really intending to, may have had his eyes opened to the opposite ideal:  to the ideal of the most exuberant, most living and most world-affirming man, who has not only learned to get on and treat with all that was and is but who wants to have it again as it was and is to all eternity, insatiably calling out da capo not only to himself but to the whole piece and play, and not only to a play but fundamentally to him who needs precisely this play — and who makes it necessary:  because he needs himself again and again — and makes himself necessary — What?  And would this not be — circulus vitiosus deus?

(Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, 82).

<p>He who, prompted by some enigmatic desire, has, like me, long endeavored to think pessimism through to the bottom and to redeem it from the half-Christian, half-German simplicity and narrowness with which it finally presented itself to this century, namely in the form of the Schopenhaueran philosophy;  he who has really gazed with an Asiatic and more than Asiatic eye down into the most world-denying of all possible modes of thought &mdash; beyond good and evil and no longer, like Buddha and Schopenhauer, under the spell and illusion of morality &mdash; perhaps by that very act, and without really intending to, may have had his eyes opened to the opposite ideal:  to the ideal of the most exuberant, most living and most world-affirming man, who has not only learned to get on and treat with all that was and is but who wants to have it again as it was and is to all eternity, insatiably calling out da capo not only to himself but to the whole piece and play, and not only to a play but fundamentally to him who needs precisely this play &mdash; and who makes it necessary:  because he needs himself again and again &mdash; and makes himself necessary &mdash; What?  And would this not be &mdash; circulus vitiosus deus?</p>

| align="right" | (Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, 82).

The formula with which the initial part of this inquiry is annotated, y0 = y.y, is intended to suggest that the present inquiry, y0, is the result of applying a generic inquiry, y, to itself.  A close inspection reveals, however, that this formula does not quite make sense, at least, not yet, and there are many things that lie in the way of its doing so.

The formula with which the initial part of this inquiry is annotated, y0 = y.y, is intended to suggest that the present inquiry, y0, is the result of applying a generic inquiry, y, to itself.  A close inspection reveals, however, that this formula does not quite make sense, at least, not yet, and there are many things that lie in the way of its doing so.