이 글은 니체의 영원회귀 사상에 대한 두 가지 해석을 다룬다. 그것들은 들뢰즈와 하이데거의 관점이다.그들을 선택한 이유는 그들이 영원회귀에 관한 해석과 관련하여 전형적이기 때문이다.들뢰즈는 탈(脫)형이상학적진영을 대표하며,하이데거는 형이상 학적이고 전통적인 진영을 고수한다. 그래서 우리는 두 측면이 서로 화해할 수 없다고 생각하기 쉽다. 그렇지만 여기서는 이런 외관이 너무 단순할 뿐만 아니라 오도적임을 밝히고 싶다. 요컨대 이 글은 니체의 영원회귀 사상이 우리가 지금껏 생각했던 것보다 더 모호하고 심오하다는 사실을 드러내는 것을 목표로 삼는다. 이러한 지점에 도달하기 위해서 우리는 방금 언급한 두 철학자의 견해를 분석할 것이다. 결론적으로 우리는 그들 이 몇 가지 측면에서 공통적임을 주장할 것이다. 그들의 공통점은 니체의 사상들 중의 사상(동일자의 영원회귀 사상)을 이해하는 데 기여할 것이다. 가령그 러한 공통점에는 비극적 인식, 순간의 중요성, 결단의 의미 등이있다. 물론 우리는 들뢰즈와 하이데거 사이의 차이도 간과해서는 안된다. 우리는 그러한 차이가 존재에 관한 해석에 대한 것이라고 말할 수 있다.들뢰즈가 영원회귀 안의 존재를 차이의 존재라고 간주한 반면, 하이데거는 영원회귀 안의 존재를 스스로 반대하는 지속적 존재라고 주장한다.들뢰즈냐 하이데거냐를 결정하는 것은 어렵다.그런 결정을 하기 위해서는 두 사상가 사이의 전면 적 비교를 하는 연구가 요구될 것이다. 그래서 여기서 우리는 니체의 디오니소스적인 것과 아폴론적인 것에 기반을 두고 있는 데리다의 관점을 통해 하이데거에 대한 한가지 비판 가능성만을 제시한다.

This paper deals with two interpretations about the thought of Nietzsche's eternal return of the same. They are the perspectives of Deleuze and Heidegger. Why I select them is that they are typical interpretations concerning the eternal return of the same. Gilles Deleuze represents the post-metaphysical front and Martin Heidegger adheres to the metaphysical and traditional front. Therefore we are tempted to think that the two aspects can't reconcile each other. Nevertheless, I want to demonstrate this appearance isn't only too simplistic but also misleading. In sum, this paper aims to expose that Nietzsche's thought of the eternal return of the same is more ambiguous and deeper than we easily have supposed so far. In order to reach this point, we will analyse two philosopher's opinions just above mentioned. In conclusion we claim that they are common with some aspects. I think their common assertions contribute to the understanding about Nietzsche's thought of thoughts(the thought of the eternal return of the same). For example, there are tragic knowledge, importance of the moment, the meaning of decision etc. Of course we should not ignore the difference between Deleuze and Heidegger. We can say that such a difference is related to the interpretation of being. While Deleuze regards the being(in the eternal return of the same) as the being of difference, Heidegger asserts the being(in the eternal return of the same) as permanent being(which Heidegger himself oppose) It is difficult to decide Deleuze or Heidegger. In order to make a decision, we shall have to research the total relations between two thinkers. So here I only suggest a possibility of the criticism of Heidegger. It is the perspective of Jacques Derrida based on Nietzsche's Dionysian and Apollinian.

This paper deals with two interpretations about the thought of Nietzsche's eternal return of the same. They are the perspectives of Deleuze and Heidegger. Why I select them is that they are typical interpretations concerning the eternal return of the same. Gilles Deleuze represents the post-metaphysical front and Martin Heidegger adheres to the metaphysical and traditional front. Therefore we are tempted to think that the two aspects can't reconcile each other. Nevertheless, I want to demonstrate this appearance isn't only too simplistic but also misleading. In sum, this paper aims to expose that Nietzsche's thought of the eternal return of the same is more ambiguous and deeper than we easily have supposed so far. In order to reach this point, we will analyse two philosopher's opinions just above mentioned. In conclusion we claim that they are common with some aspects. I think their common assertions contribute to the understanding about Nietzsche's thought of thoughts(the thought of the eternal return of the same). For example, there are tragic knowledge, importance of the moment, the meaning of decision etc. Of course we should not ignore the difference between Deleuze and Heidegger. We can say that such a difference is related to the interpretation of being. While Deleuze regards the being(in the eternal return of the same) as the being of difference, Heidegger asserts the being(in the eternal return of the same) as permanent being(which Heidegger himself oppose) It is difficult to decide Deleuze or Heidegger. In order to make a decision, we shall have to research the total relations between two thinkers. So here I only suggest a possibility of the criticism of Heidegger. It is the perspective of Jacques Derrida based on Nietzsche's Dionysian and Apollinian.

the eternal return of the same, the will to power, being, becoming, difference, Zarathustra.