Despite the criticisms that Levinas addresses to Nietzsche throughout his writing, he also praises Nietzsche’s legacy. In Humanism of the Other, he indicates how the Nietzschean man is “‘reducing’ being, […] undoing by the non-saying of dance and laughter […] the worlds that weave the aphoristic verb that demolishes them; retiring from the time of aging […] by the thought of the eternal recurrence”. Interpreting Nietzsche’s ambiguous thought of the eternal recurrence as a source of youth, Levinas brings to light (...) the fertility of Nietzsche’s concept of temporality. The aim of this paper is first to render Nietzsche’s thought on time more explicit, focusing on his approach to eternal recurrence, and then to study Levinas’ own approach to time. In the end, it will be possible to understand better Levinas’ interpretation of Nietzsche, and to shed light on some important similarities between these two different approaches to time. (shrink)

“God is dead!” This is one of the most famous claims in Nietzsche’s philosophy, difficult to fully affirm. While the higher men fail to overcome the ghost of God, Zarathustra joyfully affirms God’s death. This affirmation deconstructs the metaphysical and moral concept of “divinity,” turning it into a metaphor. The new metaphor of the divine, mainly developed through the figure of Dionysius, expresses the capacity of affirming life beyond the old values, related to the dead God. It also involves the (...) creation of a higher body beyond the body of despair, associated with these values. The purpose of this paper is to study the relationship between the death of God and the body in Nietzsche’s account by analyzing the meanings of this death for the higher men, the question of the divine in Zarathustra’s account, and the status of the Dionysian body. (shrink)