Are you always drunk? 
No no I am not. You missed the thematic implications of what the implications are of identification between a probability and. a certainty . That the roots of Nietzcheās thoughts are derivable from a common source is an inevitable conclusion since Nietzhe interpreted the trends leading to. arguable and memorable and denotable conclusions based on his observation and intuition.
On the other hand for readers and interpreters to come to the. exact same intended conclusion is a matter of probable retracing of those derivations. They will be unable to source them exactly but only connote originality by not being able to. trace the course of the trains of thought therefore. tracing it as it was an attributable. original source , bypassing most of the contents of the metaphor.
Presumably it was just rhetorical to present something unfalsifiable as potentially disprovable?
You might as well have offered to give $50 to whoever can prove Nietzscheās eternal recurrence, that $50 is still going to remain in your possession. What parameters could there be for proving or disproving any kind of resurrection? Firstly it would be required that there be no continuity of consciousness and memory, and no physical continuity (beyond the expected probability of randomly being constituted of any number of the same atoms or even entire molecules as the previous being) such it may reasonably be determined that a former life had indeed come to an end/begun again and wasnāt just continuing - and what else is there to test similarity or even sameness between two separate lives? Consciousness and memory, and physical constitution change enough during the āsameā life as it is. In light of this itās vague enough to attempt to define identity even over the course of the āsameā life lived just once.
How then is it consistently āyouā living what is identifiable as the āsameā life more than once, to any reasonable degree of precision?
Consider as well how a hypothetically identical baby might be born into a different environment (as has been simulated with identical twins being separated at birth) - for all the common ground they might surprisingly share if the different environments were similar enough, the more different the environment the more that baby would grow up into a different āpersonā: āyouā are the interaction of your environment with your genetics. With some things in life behaving very much in line with the āsensitivity to initial conditionsā of chaos theory (spiraling into radically different outcomes with just the tiniest of discrepancies), it would follow that all initial environmental conditions would have to be identical in order for you to live the exact same life more than once, an outcome that would require the suspense of natural laws unless there were some perfect universal reverting mechanism that has never so far even been hinted at - quite the opposite from empirical evidence gained so far in fact, the universe seems to have be expanding since time began and has therefore been ever-changing all the while. Even if it were possible for your life to recur, perhaps separated by countless aeons each time, you wonāt currently remember eternally living the same life as you are currently living any previous times, so nor would your future lives be in any way affected by your current one - it would be unnoticeable even if it were true. Practically speaking, therefore, itās untrue - even if by some infinitesimal probability it actually were true.
Anyway. itās been a while since I read Nietzsche but I seem to remember the eternal recurrence as being just a thought experiment to both determine some kind of quality to your current life (are you some kind of āHigher Manā? etc.) and as something to make you think about how you would continue your life such that eternally living it over and over might become something of an appealing prospect if it wasnāt alreadyā¦ issues that I laid out in my previous paragraphs aside of course.
But regardless of whether my response merits your $50 it looks like youāre banned anyway, but feel free to read it eternally over and over if you do still happen to check out posts in this forum.
There are three main aspects: i[/i] Ewige Wiederkehr des Gleichen (eternal return of the same); i[/i] Ćbermensch; i[/i] Wille zur Macht (will to might/power).
neitche, in terms of eternal recurrence is a horrid narcissist of being healthier and less tormented than others ā¦ his entire philosophy revolves around life not getting worse for him than it already is, not minding lives much worse off.
The eternal recurrence is evil