This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site, while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used. For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
Cookie settings
Magazinsendung
Vergütungstarif

Glossary entry

German term or phrase:

Ungewordenes

English translation:

'that which has not become' / 'that which did not become"

Added to glossary by Craig Meulen
Oct 21, 2010 11:21
13 yrs ago
German term

Ungewordenes

German to English Art/Literary Philosophy Nietzsche
Hi, I'm Spanish/Portuguese translator working on a philosophical text which cites Nietzsche. Rather than translate from the Portuguese translation of this term (which has in turn come from Italian...), I wonder if someone could help me with the standard English translation?

I've tried googling, but unfortunately don't have a citation for the brief passage in question.

many thanks
Proposed translations (English)
4 +3 "not-become" / "not come into existence"
4 +1 unrealised (potential)
4 Yet to become (reality)
3 ungenerated
References
Unevolved?
Change log

Oct 22, 2010 06:52: Astrid Elke Witte changed "Term asked" from "ungewordenes" to "Ungewordenes"

Nov 4, 2010 12:25: Craig Meulen Created KOG entry

Discussion

Lucy Phillips (asker) Oct 25, 2010:
thanks to all I hope people don't mind if I leave this question open - there has been so much knowledgeable debate that it seems most useful/fairest to let members decide on the best answer. I really appreciate all the help. I sent the translation in with 'un-becoming' since I had to send it off fairly quickly and this was in fact nearest to what I had been asked to translate from Portuguese - ie it was a translation of an interpretation of 'ungewordenes'.
Helen Shiner Oct 23, 2010:
@ Annett Yes, thank you, Annett, I was able to read that as soon as the Asker posted it. I remain of the opinion that 'did not become' is the incorrect tense. In EN it would be used had an event happened at a particular time: 'She saw the man as he approached her, but did not recognise him.' 'Had not become', however, is used when a state persists over a longer or continuous period: 'She had never become used to the fact that ...'. I appreciate that this distinction is perhaps harder for a non-native to appreciate. Whether or not there is potential for change in the future is not really germane to the issue, though it exists, but this temporal aspect is, given that eternity is more than a mere moment. This is my last comment on this and I would prefer to now wait for the Asker to make up her own mind.
Annett Kottek (X) Oct 23, 2010:
And, of course, ‘ungeworden' is not an adjective, as I claim below, but a participle. My apologies.
Annett Kottek (X) Oct 23, 2010:
@ Helen I was taking for granted that 'nicht' and the prefix 'un-' both refer to an absence and therefore have the same meaning (cf. not realised/unrealised). Perhaps that is not so. But my point stands. ‘[N]ichts Gewordenes’ and ‘ungeworden’ both describe to the same thing. Here’s the actual word in context: ‘vielmehr alles ist ewig, ****ungeworden****: wenn es ein Chaos der Kräfte gab, so war auch das Chaos ewig und kehrte in jedem Ringe wieder’ - - the return of chaos is predicted and thus not merely a possibility.
Bernhard Sulzer Oct 22, 2010:
@Helen I do see your point. "That which has not YET become" is different from "...HAS the potential to do so". But if it has the potential to do so, it might actually "become" and it has not yet done so. It is this possibility of becoming, this potential to do so that I wanted to stay clear of.
Helen Shiner Oct 22, 2010:
@ Bernhard I don't do smileys because, for me, they are for teenagers! I do not comprehend why you do not see the difference between something that has not yet become and something that has the potential for it. I must now leave it at that and let the Asker select her preferred solution.
Bernhard Sulzer Oct 22, 2010:
@Helen You say below it is about "that which HAS not become', i.e. it may still become, that is has the potential to do so." So does that not imply it has not yet become?
I understand "Ungewordenes" as something that is but has not gone through and will never go through the process of "becoming". That's why I was leaning towards "did not become". As always, I am always open to being convinced otherwise. :)
Bernhard Sulzer Oct 22, 2010:
@Helen "That which did not become" says to me that "it" never went through the process of becoming but that "it" nevertheless exists. The aspect of "never having gone through the process of becoming but existing" is stronger here I believe than in
"that which has not become": this is IMO more open-ended, leaving room for a future process of becoming, thus possibly indicating it is something yet to be seen. Compare:
Has it arisen? Possible answer: No. But it will.
Did it arise? Possible answer: No. It has been existing, always.
Those are my thoughts. And, sorry, yes thank you, if you meant to thank me. It just didn't sound like a thanks to me. I guess I was missing a smiley. But I needed to "just" clarify that I wasn't copying from your entry. I wanted to make that clear to the other readers. :)
Helen Shiner Oct 22, 2010:
@ Annett I did not say that we had no context. I imagine you also can see that 'nicht Gewordenes' is not the same as 'Ungewordenes'.
Helen Shiner Oct 22, 2010:
@ Bernhard Just to assure you that a native speaker would not understand 'that which has not become' as implying 'yet'.
Secondly, what a shame that you would object to be thanked.
Bernhard Sulzer Oct 22, 2010:
@Helen just to clarify: I am supporting Craig's "that which did not become" or, as he phrased it in his discussion: It did not become, not his entry"not-become"; I do not agree with "that which has not become' because I read that as "that which has not 'yet' become", indicating that it will become sometime in the future.
Regarding your comment tat I am repeating your argument down even to the use of the word "Unwerdendes". I believe I am not repeating your argument, I am discussing that term and other things in my own original way.
Annett Kottek (X) Oct 22, 2010:
But we've got the context! Asker provided it below in the discussion box (in English) and I posted the German original. I'd argue that my reading of 'Ungewordenes' also applies to the first example I posted, in which Nietzsche explains that our emotions appear to us as having always been the same throughout the ages, i.e. that they did not become. Of course, he believes this to be false, but he concedes that it's difficult to imagine emotions as changeable.
Helen Shiner Oct 22, 2010:
Annett We have not been asked to translate 'nichts Gewordenes' but rather 'Ungewordenes' and in a different context. I would translate them differently, but let's stick to what we have been asked to do. Unrealised, by the way, does not mean that something does not exist necessarily. It can also mean that it is not fully unfolded, that it CONTAINS rather than IS potential to develop, unfurl, grow, truly become itself.
Annett Kottek (X) Oct 22, 2010:
Hi Craig, Nietzsche is explicit: ‘Der Kreislauf ist ****nichts Gewordenes****, er ist das Urgesetz’ & it would be wrong, IMO, to translate ‘nichts Gewordenes’ as something that is as yet ‘unrealized’ or only a ‘potential’. The ‘Kreislauf’ already exists and in its eternal and unchanging existence makes possible potential and flux. That is the one law that guarantees what follows. The claim that everything is in flux would otherwise be logically inconsistent. If everything was truly in flux, then that fundamental principle would itself be subject to change & tomorrow we might find ourselves in a world were everything is a priori fixed.

If the ‘Kreislauf’ had unfolded/evolved/emerged over time to its present state, it would mean that it is in fact a changeable phenomenon, which in turn implies that it could change again at some future point.

- - Sorry to go on and on, but it's important for Nietzsche that the first principle, to use your words, "'did not' (and never will) become" . . . . :-)
Craig Meulen Oct 22, 2010:
:-) Reading this reminds me why we always need comprehensive footnotes in philosophical translations :-)

I like Helen's clarification of the distinction between "did not" and "has not" - I've become (sic) unsure which one I would choose here. Helen's superior knowledge of Nietzsche is convincing, but I still tend to interpret this passage in the way I described earlier (similar to Annett's), which might suggest the "did not" (and never will) become.
Annett Kottek (X) Oct 22, 2010:
I think Nietzsche is trying to deal with a logical problem here. The point made in the passage is that the first principle cannot become (and did not become): it is eternal and unchanging. Nietzsche is speaking about a stability (‘Kreislauf’) that comes before any potential (‘Alles Werden ist innerhalb des Kreislaufs’). I agree that for Nietzsche the universe is all potential; at the same time it rests on one principle that is not potential, namely the ‘Kreislauf’ (and ‘ungeworden’ refers to this first principle - - and yes, it sounds a bit like god).
Helen Shiner Oct 22, 2010:
Also, Annett It is important to stress that it is not about 'that which DID not become' but instead 'that which HAS not become', i.e. it may still become, that is has the potential to do so. It is out of this ever-expanding universe that all things are generated or may be.
Helen Shiner Oct 22, 2010:
@ Annett I mean precisely what you say in your last sentence. I certainly do not say anywhere that the universe is merely a potential. I understand this as saying, in this instance, that everything is eternal, unrealised potential.
Annett Kottek (X) Oct 22, 2010:
@Helen I don't follow your reasoning. The adjective 'ungeworden' occurs in a passage where Nietzsche discusses the universe and first principles. He insists quite emphatically that the 'Gesetz des Kreises' is eternal and did not become. Neither is the universe merely a potential - - it actually is. 'Becoming' and therefore potential are, however, contained within.
Helen Shiner Oct 22, 2010:
Context I think a lot of the confusion here stems from the fact that our Asker posted this originally without a sentence including the term and we, or I at least, answered in terms of the wider use of this term in Nietzsche. When one occurrence of the term was then given to us, it was non-personal. People who have joined the debate since perhaps do not appreciate this. My argumentation addresses this wider usage as well as the limited context we have.
Helen Shiner Oct 22, 2010:
Ewig I do not see the term 'das Ungewordene' as a synonym for eternal. It refers to potential.
Helen Shiner Oct 22, 2010:
@ Craig Please do not misrepresent me. Personal development? That means something entirely different. My objection to your suggestion is that you wrap it in terms of something creating something else, whether God or not. Since for Nietzsche God was dead, his use of the term 'werden' in this context is fundamental. The becoming is not generated from outside of the individual; it is immanent. To misunderstand this, is to misunderstand Nietzsche. The suggestion of 'that which is has not become' was mine, in fact, even though Bernhard seems to attribute it to you with your incorrect and rather clumsy 'not-become' (sorry to put it so bluntly). This 'ungewordenes' whether personal or not refers to a pre-existant potential for becoming which, however, has not become. Your solutions a) to e) do not apply.
Helen Shiner Oct 22, 2010:
@ Bernhard Thanks for repeating my argument, down even to the use of the word, 'unwerdenes'!! I don't, however, agree with 'to emerge' since that would suggest that the thing emerging may exist somewhere else and emerge from that.
Annett Kottek (X) Oct 22, 2010:
@Bernhard Just read your comments and that is also my understanding of the term.
Craig Meulen Oct 22, 2010:
God And to counter Helen's objection: Some Eastern philosophers continue this line of reasoning about 'eternals' to *refute* the idea of a Creator, so they would be happy to agree with Nietzsche that there is no God.
Craig Meulen Oct 22, 2010:
Now we have the original quote ... ... I'm convinced that in this passage, Nietzsche is indeed putting "ewig" (eternal) and "ungeworden" together as (almost) synonymous and therefore I'm going to plead once more for my original argumentation and the use of the verb 'become'. Helen's objection that Nietzsche uses this term to talk about the topic of personal development doesn't apply to this passage, where he is imho comparing the universal laws to the attitudes which humans have to their development.

Combining everyone's useful tips about the grammar and how to translate it in philosophical texts, I would definitely choose the following translation:
"that which did not become"
Bernhard Sulzer Oct 22, 2010:
note regarding emerge Some people might be uncomfortable due to the concept of emergence/emergent property:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence
alternative: that which did not arise/did not become

I equate "Ungewordenes" with "das Ungewordene"
Bernhard Sulzer Oct 22, 2010:
un-becoming as "das Unwerdende" and thoughts I would see "un-becoming" as the state/condition of not coming about/ into existence/into being - IMO in German "unwerdend/das Unwerdende (the un-becoming)", slightly diff. from das "Ungewordene" = that which did not become/come about/ into existence /into being but always "is/exists". The first term (that which is un-becoming = das Unwerdende) says "it" simply never goes through the process of "becoming" and that might make "it" weaker, possibly non-existing/non-being; the second term (das Ungewordene) says "it" never went through the "process" of "becoming/coming into existence/ into being/about but "it" always "is" (it simply existed and exists and will always exist). I thought maybe" that which did not originate" (das Ungewordene) vs. that which originated (das Gewordene) could work too. Problem is it does not describe the (non-)"process" of becoming/coming about/into existence/into being. It only denotes it has (no) origin - it does not hint at the development or lack thereof of sth. that exists.
Then I thought "that which did not emerge" which hints at a (non-)"process" and leaves open that "it" nevertheless always existed and does exist forever (without cause)
Helen Shiner Oct 22, 2010:
Un-becoming I agree with Nesrin. It would be quite normal in a philosophical text to go for something along the lines of 'that which ...' for such a GER noun. My 'unrealised' succeeds in getting across the notion of there being an untapped potential which could 'werden' but is not, if you prefer to avoid a complex solution.
Lucy Phillips (asker) Oct 21, 2010:
Hi Nesrin - the idea was not to use 'unbecoming' but the invented un-becoming, to contrast with 'becoming'.
Nesrin Oct 21, 2010:
I don't think you should use "unbecoming" here as the word has a very different meaning:
un·be·com·ing
• adj. (esp. of clothing or a color) not flattering: a stout lady in an unbecoming striped sundress.
∎ (of a person's attitude or behavior) not fitting or appropriate; unseemly: it was unbecoming for a university to do anything so crass as advertising its wares.
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O999-unbecoming.html
Helen Shiner Oct 21, 2010:
Misunderstanding There seems to be a misconception about what Nietzsche means by 'werden' here. He exorts people to 'become thyself'. This is about the Will to Power, the Superman (Übermensch). What he means is, don't follow the herd, become your authentic, powerful self, i.e. if you are a great man, don't let society dictate how you should be. Don't be constrained, live and act without the normal socialising rules, trample the herd, if necessary, to achieve your aims. http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=JSI3Oz8wLugC&pg=PA7&lpg=P...
Annett Kottek (X) Oct 21, 2010:
@ Lucy,
Yes, I guess we're looking for an antonym of 'becoming' . . . . Or maybe you can rephrase it and say 'everything is eternal, and not becoming' or 'not in a state of becoming'?
Lucy Phillips (asker) Oct 21, 2010:
in my original draft, I came up with the term "un-becoming", as a result of translating it from the Portuguese. Does this sound plausible?

the context would be the following quote: “There was not first Chaos and then at once a harmonious and stable circular movement of all the forces: on the contrary, everything is eternal, **un-becoming** [Ungewordenes]
Nesrin Oct 21, 2010:
Oh I see.. Google tells me Nietzsche uses it as a noun: "Ungewordenes".. ok.
Nesrin Oct 21, 2010:
ungewordenes.... Hi Lucy - you don't even have the rest of the phrase? Like what is "ungeworden"?

Proposed translations

+3
2 hrs
Selected

"not-become" / "not come into existence"

imho we're talking about whether something came into existence or whether it exists eternally - i.e. there was no beginning.

It did not come into existence - it did not become.

As a noun it's more difficult in English: the "unborn" or "uncreated" are sometimes used but in the fine nuances of philosophical argument are not sysnonymous, since the German "werden" is an intransitive verb. So if something is "ungeworden" that is independent of whether there is an agent or not (a creator).

So best to stick with an intransitive verb in English, and we're left with no real option other than a clumsy: the "not-become".



--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 Stunden (2010-10-21 14:04:16 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

To clarify, in some areas of philosophical debate there could be things that
a) exist
b) were not generated by another thing (ungenerated)
c) were not born of another (unborn)
d) were not created by another (uncreated)
but
e) they did come into existence of their own accord

So these would not be "Ungewordenes", despite the applicability of the other adjectives suggested (b,c,d).
Peer comment(s):
neutral Helen Shiner : This really does not sound Nietzschean at all, not the EN, nor the sentiment.
2 mins
I admit I'm not a Nietzschean :-) So I bow to your superior knowledge.
neutral Andrew Bramhall : Also sprach Helen.
41 mins
agree Bernhard Sulzer : that which did not come about/ into existence - although I would choose "did not emerge/come about" or your "that which did not become" which work better (IMO) for something that "exists/is", always.
14 hrs
agree Annett Kottek (X) : I also see it as synonymous with eternal and unchanging. But I prefer Helen's rephrased version of 'it did not become', i.e. 'that which has not become'.
18 hrs
Thanks. However, use of present perfect "has not" carries with it the same implication as "yet" - i.e. that it could become. I would stick with simple past "that which did not become"
agree Harald Moelzer (medical-translator) : with Bernhard
4 days
Something went wrong...
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer. Comment: "Selected automatically based on peer agreement."
15 mins

Yet to become (reality)

Ewigkeit der Welt – WikipediaTranslate this page
Ursprünge · Philosophie · Religion · Physikalische Kosmologie
Für ihn war es unmöglich, dass etwas Gewordenes ewig sei oder etwas Ungewordenes vergehen könnte, wie Timaois behauptet hatte. Die Ewigkeit der Welt, die sich für Aristoteles ...

de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ewigkeit_der_Welt · Cached pageGott hat die Welt erschaffen, aber wer hat…Translate this page
Alles was sie kennen ist geworden, wie kann es da etwas ungewordenes geben? Dann kommt der Vorwurf, das sei gegen die Kausalität. Das Gegenteil ist der Fall!!

de.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081110152129AAaVRDO · Cached page
Peer comment(s):
neutral Helen Shiner : but it may never be realised, so 'yet' is not really appropriate here in my view. Sorry to disagree.//Only sorry because it is the first time we 'speak'.
1 hr
No need to be sorry to disagree- it's healthy !
neutral Craig Meulen : On the right track, but agree w/Helen - not talking about something that is _as yet_ not in existence. Something that does exist, but the question is whether there was a beginning? Did it 'become' or has it existed forever, no beginning?
2 hrs
Yes, like Christmasses Past, Christmasses Present, and those yet to come.
Something went wrong...
22 mins

ungenerated

I've found several references for that. Not referring to Nietzsche, but to the ancient Greek philosopher Parmenides:

German:
Das Sein dieses Einen ist nach Parmenides ein Sein in un- oder ... ist.3 Vielmehr ist es ungeworden und unvergänglich,4 so daß es als allgegenwärti- ...
deposit.ddb.de/cgi-bin/dokserv?idn=979835429...

Das Seiende ist demnach unentstanden („ungeworden“) und unzerstörbar. Parmenides´. Argumente sind die, dass das Sein, falls entstanden, notwendig aus dem ...
content.grin.com/document/v71532.pdf

English:
When Parmenides argues so urgently against becoming and birth, this is, as I see it, aimed at laying the ... among others, 'ungenerated' and 'imperishable' ...
books.google.co.uk/books?isbn=9051835922...

Greek philosophical tradition with Parmenides; and Coxon's own conver- .... i.e. to exist; second, to be ungenerated and imperishable is precisely what is ...
www.jstor.org/stable/4182287
Something went wrong...
+1
2 hrs

unrealised (potential)

This would be my stab at it.

Only in the dance do I know how to speak the parable of the highest things:--and now hath my grandest parable remained unspoken in my limbs!

Unspoken and unrealised hath my highest hope remained! And there have perished for me all the visions and consolations of my youth!

How did I ever bear it? How did I survive and surmount such wounds? How did my soul rise again out of those sepulchres?

http://nietzsche.thefreelibrary.com/Thus-Spake-Zarathustra/3...

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 hrs (2010-10-21 13:31:08 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Das Ungewordene: the unrealised / that which is unrealised

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 hrs (2010-10-21 13:31:39 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

That which remains unrealised....

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 hrs (2010-10-21 14:06:32 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Ganz abgesehen davon, daß für Nietzsche der Wille zur Macht zwar das bewegende Prinzip eines jeden Werdens ist, an sich aber - ebenso wie Schopenhauers Wille - etwas Ungewordenes: "Man kann das, was die Ursache dafür ist, daß es überhaupt Entwicklung gibt, nicht selbst wieder auf dem Wege der Forschung über Entwicklung finden; man soll es nicht als ´werdend´ verstehen wollen, noch weniger als geworden ... Der ´Wille zur Macht´ kann nicht geworden sein."*102 Man sieht hier klar, wie oberfläch- -303-
lich bei Nietzsche alles Werden, alles Geschichtliche ist: nur eine Erscheinungsweise "ewiger" Prinzipien.

Werden in Nietzsche is 'to become'. So, literally, it would be translated as 'that which has not become'. The Wille zur Macht is 'unrealised', I would argue.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 hrs (2010-10-21 14:07:09 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

The link for the above quote: http://www.mxks.de/files/bibliothek/Lukacs.DieZerstoerungDer...

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 hrs (2010-10-21 14:11:37 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

http://fractalontology.wordpress.com/2007/12/10/beyond-desir...

In this essay I shall provide a reading of Nietzsche's “theory of time.” This theory includes, most obviously, what he says about “becoming”: his well-known insistence that the world is “not being but becoming.” But the theory also draws in a variety of his other positions, including his critical treatments of concepts such as substance and causation, his teaching of the eternal return, and his complex views about memory, guilt, and responsibility.

http://www.blackwellreference.com/public/tocnode?id=g9781405...

Nietzschean ontology emphasizes transformation and the eternal recurrence of life. Nietzsche agrees with Heraclitus that reality is a continual state of becoming, and is not a state of being. Reality is eternally changing, and is not a constant, immutable state of being. Reality consists of plurality and change, rather than duration and unity. ‘Being’ is an empty fiction; ‘becoming’ is what is real.

http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/nietzsche.html

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 hrs (2010-10-21 14:13:36 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

If it is not too clumsy, maybe 'that which has not become' would be fine. It would be precise.
Peer comment(s):
neutral Craig Meulen : To me your answer is still on the same wrong track that Oliver's answer is on - see my comment there. // So you're agreeing with my preference for "become" now? ;-)) I was about to move in your direction with "evolved"-"unevolved"// God?
27 mins
So I presume you see it as something 'ewig' or some such.Though I have to say that Nietzsche uses 'ewig' for that.//I haven't changed my view. I still disagree with your understanding of the term. Nietzsche declared God was dead.
agree Hayley Haupt : I agree - "the unrealized" or "that which is unrealized" come closest to adequately expressing my understanding of the concept (potential)...and sound more "Nietzschean".
4 days
Thank you, Hayley. Good to hear from someone who knows Nietzsche, too.
Something went wrong...

Reference comments

8 hrs
Reference:

Unevolved?

Hi Lucy, can you post more context? I found one use of 'Ungewordenes' in the Posthumous Fragments, quoted below. In this passage, 'Ungewordenes' refers to things that seems to have just sprung into existence, fully formed; things that did not go through developmental stages - - so Craig's 'unevolved' sounds pretty good to me. I don't know if there's a standard translation for it.

‘II [253]
Wenn die moralischen Leiden das Leben schwer gemacht
haben ⎯ es hängt daran, daß es durchaus nicht möglich ist, eine
moralische Empfindung relativ zu nehmen; sie ist wesentlich
unbedingt, wie die Körper uns unbedingt erscheinen, ins-
gleichen der Staat, die Seele, das Gemeinwesen. Wir mögen uns
noch so sehr das Gewordensein von dem allem vorhalten:
es wirkt auf uns als ****Ungewordenes****, Unvergängliches und legt
absolute Pflichten auf. „Der Nächste“ ebenfalls, wie weise
wir auch über ihn sind. Der Trieb zum Unbedingt-
nehmen ist sehr mächtig angezüchtet.’

From the Nachgelassene Fragmente 1880-1882‬, ed. by Giorgio Colli and Mazzino Montinari, pp. 537-8
http://books.google.de/books?id=fayRtylupOMC&pg=PA538&lpg=PA...

My [rough] translation of the passage in bold: It [i.e. the 'moralische Leiden' = or 'moral suffering'] appears to us as something that ****did not unfold or evolve**** [over time], as sth. eternal, thereby placing us under obligations that are absolute.

If you read the previous fragment on page 537, you find that Nietzsche discusses a possible evolution of emotional responses.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 9 hrs (2010-10-21 20:29:05 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Another translation for 'das Unvergängliche' is 'that which is unchanging'.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 9 hrs (2010-10-21 20:54:22 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Here's the original:

‘11[157]
Hüten wir uns, diesem Kreislaufe irgend ein Streben, ein Ziel beizulegen: oder es nach unseren Bedürfnissen abzuschätzen als langweilig, dumm usw. Gewiß kommt in ihm der höchste Grad von Unvernunft ebenso wohl vor wie das Gegentheil: aber es ist nicht darnach zu messen, Vernünftigkeit oder Unvernünftigkeit sind keine Prädikate für das All. — Hüten wir uns, das Gesetz dieses Kreises als geworden zu denken, nach der falschen Analogie der Kreisbewegung innerhalb des Ringes: es gab nicht erst ein Chaos und nachher allmählich eine harmonischere und endlich eine fest kreisförmige Bewegung aller Kräfte: vielmehr alles ist ewig, ungeworden: wenn es ein Chaos der Kräfte gab, so war auch das Chaos ewig und kehrte in jedem Ringe wieder. Der Kreislauf ist nichts Gewordenes, er ist das Urgesetz, so wie die Kraftmenge Urgesetz ist, ohne Ausnahme und Übertretung. Alles Werden ist innerhalb des Kreislaufs und der Kraftmenge; also nicht durch falsche Analogie die werdenden und vergehenden Kreisläufe z.B. der Gestirne oder Ebbe und Fluth Tag und Nacht Jahreszeiten zur Charakteristik des ewigen Kreislaufs zu verwenden.’
http://www.nietzschesource.org/texts/eKGWB/NF-1881,11

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 19 hrs (2010-10-22 07:06:27 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

‘Unrealised’ is unsuitable, IMO, because it suggests that the thing does not yet exist [only as potential]. The antonym of ‘the unrealized’ would be ‘the realized’, which emphasis lies on its being there rather than its becoming.

In my reading of the two passages quoted, the concept of 'Ungewordenes' is that which already is</> in existence; and in its being, that thing either is, or it merely appears to be, eternal and unchanging. Change is an inherent attribute of ‘becoming’. Note also that Nietzsche places ‘Ungewordenes’ opposite ‘Gewordenes’, i.e. that which has been through the process of becoming/that which has become. I reiterate that the two things compared here are [in a state of being].

Yes, Nietzsche is all about the potential of being & he wants people to know that they can change the world, themselves. But in order to do that, they must first reject the idea that some things are eternal and unchangeable!

Maybe ‘evolution’ has too many Darwinian overtones, but it explains the concept perfectly. It might seem to us that morals and our moral attitudes towards certain behaviours have always been as we experience them now. It seems to us that our emotional responses did not go through a process of evolution or becoming but that that they have always been thus. And here Nietzsche would say ‘not true’ – they did indeed evolve (he explains it very well in ‘The Genealogy of Morals’).

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 20 hrs (2010-10-22 07:39:27 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Another way of thinking about 'das Ungewordene': that which is but did not become.
Peer comments on this reference comment:
neutral Helen Shiner : I would be a bit careful with 'unevolved' due to Darwinian overtones. It also presumes that it exists, has become, but has not evolved further from that point.//Not sure I understand your comments. I don't see need for 'state'. That would be 'unwerdenes'.
1 hr
Ahistorical? // Sorry about that, I pressed the send button by mistake (I'm also cooking supper). But that may have too many Marxist overtones? What about a simple 'that which is not in a state of becoming"?
agree Craig Meulen : At last the original quote - thanks Annett. (I'll cont. as discussion entry)
11 hrs
Thank you, Craig.
agree Bernhard Sulzer : "that which is but did not become" is what I understand it to be (as of now). :)
21 hrs
Thanks, Bernhard.
Something went wrong...
Close search
Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search