Deleuze, Nietzsche and what Modern Philosophy is about

Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) and Gilles Deleuze (1925-1995), two titans of Modern Philosophy, share a common interest for the notion of the Eternal Return. In the Modern understanding, the Eternal Return is not about the repetition of sameness, in fact just the opposite: it's about the concept of Difference, that is, change, which is the object of the Eternal Return.

Support:

[Andres-nnit]

I thank you for this because I feel more people should be inaugurated into Deleuze’s reading of Nietzsche as opposed to many of the other readings and discourses around Nietzsche and critical philosophy that exists on YouTube.

[inesayari.]

This is the best youtube video that has ever explored one of Deleuze's complex concepts in a simple, yet very accurate way. Immensely grateful! Keep going ✊

[comradethatmetalguy]

I found a treasure on this channel ❤ thank you for this amazing content.

[samuelenanni]

Good work with the Deleuze videos, might not look like much today but they are a useful resource for a lot of people

[joaoboechat]

This video is so good! Thank's a lot

[paulhaube]

I think the Stoics already explained this as well as entropy. Or the concept of flux.

[Silvercardinal]

Good summary on Deleuza and Neitzche, but I disagree that this is what modern philosophy is about. Modern philosophy is about many things and very little. It's an academic bureaucracy mostly, but there are still passionate thinkers who go against the grain; they are where modern philosophy is also. I think of the ones who continue to write about idealism, taking their original meaning seriously, as the ones who contributing real value these days.

[jakemcnamee]

I've been thinking about cyclical and linear time.
And asking how different is the reoccurrence.
An eternal cycle with some change.
Is the eternal some perfectly symmetrical thing, or is it odd, like the number 7.
Does the wheel of fortune have 8 or 7 sides.
Apparently the musical scale is broken down into 7(I'm ignorant of that), but something imperfect is always left looking for completion, and so it is continuous and eternal amd not stagnant

[lucasmiguel]

Could you provide me some examples of Nietzsche describing the eternal return as a repetition of difference? I'm quite new to Deleuze, and coming from a nietzschean context, I've always interpreted the eternal return as a device for will to power more than anything. Something to understand how life-affirming you are. The whole metaphysics of forces Deleuze introduces is pretty new to me and I find it to be as confusing as it is fascinating

[threeblindchickens]

I thought Nietzsche was pretty clear that every cycle is exactly the same. I like Deleuze's interpretation more than Nietzsche's but I don't see the evidence for Nietzsche having the same idea of eternal return that Deleuze does

[mdhossin]

I read many times Deleuze books however I am still incapable to understand it

[adamursenbach]

Hi! I find this channel interesting, but your analysis in this video seems incorrect and I am wondering if you have information I lack. In GS 341, the eternal recurrence is presented by the demon as follows:

"This life, as you live it at present, and have lived it, you must live it once more, and also innumerable times; and there will be nothing new in it, but every pain and every joy and every thought and every sigh, and all the unspeakably small and great in thy life must come to you again, and all in the same series and sequence - and similarly this spider and this moonlight among the trees, and similarly this moment, and I myself. The eternal sand-glass of existence will ever be turned once more, and you with it, you speck of dust!"

This seems to be quite explicitly recurrence of the same. Is there any passage you can point to which points in favour of difference? I'm concerned that you may be overwriting Nietzsche with Deleuze.

[alvesfabi]

What drives selection of difference? it's clear that active / reactive / nihilism are reactions of each other - but what drives "selection"?

[javierismaelmartinez]

I prefered the interpretation of Eternal Return as a challenge, a challenge to behave and choose the right things. The ultime form of affitmation.
The more I read Nietzsch the more I understand that his ideas are attempt to understand and process his depression.
Also, the idea of Power inclines more to the "capacity to do" than "to control".

[johnzerzan]

I think Nietzche is highly overrated honestly.

[tsenotanev]

and all this is perfectly reproducible in hegel form and logic .. from where deleuze's obstinate and vain attempts to set himself apart from hegel, often by declaring hegel vain and nugatory...
...maybe he wanted, as an illustration to his philosophical invention, to become the return of hegel's difference...

[mcgee]

All knowledge is Subjective. In the end there is no you and no freewill. You exist to survive and possibly reproduce. Like a virus. Causal Determinism is the rule. The End.