Editing Eternal return (section)

===Interpretation===
[[Martin Heidegger]] points out that Nietzsche's first mention of eternal recurrence in ''The Gay Science'' presents this concept as a hypothetical question rather than postulating it as a fact. Many readings argue that Nietzsche was not attempting to make a cosmological or theoretical claim i.e. saying that eternal recurrence is a true statement about how the world works. Instead, the emotional reaction to the thought experiment serves to reveal whether one is living life to the best.<ref>{{Citation |last=Anderson |first=R. Lanier |title=Friedrich Nietzsche |date=2022 |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2022/entries/nietzsche/ |encyclopedia=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |editor-last=Zalta |editor-first=Edward N. |access-date=2023-11-28 |edition=Summer 2022 |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University}}</ref> According to Heidegger, the significant point is the burden imposed by the ''question'' of eternal recurrence, regardless of whether or not such a thing could possibly be true.<ref>{{cite book |last=Heidegger |first=Martin |title=Nietzsche, Volume II: The Eternal Recurrence of the Same |translator=[[David Farrell Krell]] |location=New York |publisher=Harper and Row |date=1984 |page=25}}</ref> The idea is similar to Nietzsche's concept of ''[[amor fati]]'', which he describes in ''[[Ecce Homo (book)|Ecce Homo]]'': "My formula for greatness in a human being is ''amor fati'': that one wants nothing to be different, not forward, not backward, not in all eternity. Not merely to bear what is necessary, still less conceal it ... but ''love'' it."<ref>{{cite book |last=Nietzsche |first=Frederich |translator=Walter Kaufmann |title=Basic Writings of Nietzsche |publisher=Modern Library |date=2000 |isbn=978-0-6797-8339-8 |page=714}}</ref><ref name=Sinhababu>{{cite journal |last1=Sinhababu |first1=Neil |last2=Kuong |first2=Un Teng |date=2019 |title=Loving the Eternal Recurrence |journal=The Journal of Nietzsche Studies |volume=50 |issue=1 |pages=106–124 |doi=10.5325/jnietstud.50.1.0106 |doi-access=free}}</ref>

On the other hand, Nietzsche's posthumously published notebooks contain an attempt at a logical proof of eternal return, which is often adduced in support of the claim that Nietzsche believed in the theory as a real possibility.<ref name=Sinhababu/> The proof is based upon the premise that the universe is infinite in duration, but contains a finite quantity of energy. This being the case, all matter in the universe must pass through a finite number of combinations, and each series of combinations must eventually repeat in the same order, thereby creating "a circular movement of absolutely identical series".<ref>{{cite book |editor-last=Ludovici |editor-first=Anthony M. |date=1913 |volume=II |title=Friedrich Nietzsche: The Will to Power |at=§1066 |url=https://www.gutenberg.org/files/52915/52915-h/52915-h.htm#Page_428 |via=Project Gutenberg}}</ref> However, scholars such as Neil Sinhababu and Kuong Un Teng have suggested that the reason this material remained unpublished was because Nietzsche himself was unconvinced that his argument would hold up to scrutiny.<ref name=Sinhababu/>{{notetag|One rebuttal of Nietzsche's theory, put forward by his contemporary [[Georg Simmel]], is summarised by [[Walter Kaufmann (philosopher)|Walter Kaufmann]] as follows: "Even if there were exceedingly few things in a finite space in an infinite time, they would not have to repeat in the same configurations. Suppose there were three wheels of equal size, rotating on the same axis, one point marked on the circumference of each wheel, and these three points lined up in one straight line. If the second wheel rotated twice as fast as the first, and if the speed of the third wheel was 1/π of the speed of the first, the initial line-up would never recur."<ref>{{harvnb|Kaufmann|1974|page=[https://archive.org/details/nietzschephiloso00kauf/page/326/mode/2up?view=theater 327]}}</ref>}}

A third possibility is that Nietzsche was attempting to create a new ethical standard by which people should judge their own behaviour.<ref name=Oger>{{cite journal |last=Oger |first=Eric |date=1997 |title=The Eternal Return as Crucial Test |journal=Journal of Nietzsche Studies |issue=14 |pages=4–7 |jstor=20717674}}</ref> In one of his unpublished notes, Nietzsche writes: "The question which thou wilt have to answer before every deed that thou doest: 'is this such a deed as I am prepared to perform an incalculable number of times?' is the best ballast."<ref>{{cite book |editor-last=Ludovici |editor-first=Anthony M. |date=1911 |url=https://www.gutenberg.org/files/52263/52263-h/52263-h.htm#THE_ETERNAL_RECURRENCE |title=Friedrich Nietzsche: The Twilight of the Idols |chapter=The Eternal Recurrence |at=§28 |via=Project Gutenberg}}</ref> Taken in this sense, the doctrine has been compared to the [[categorical imperative]] of [[Immanuel Kant]].<ref>{{harvnb|Kaufmann|1974|pages=[https://archive.org/details/nietzschephiloso00kauf/page/322/mode/2up?view=theater 22–23]}}</ref> Once again, however, the objection is raised that no such ethical imperative appears in any of Nietzsche's published writings,<ref name=Oger/> and this interpretation is therefore rejected by most modern scholars.<ref name=Sinhababu/>