This paper proposes a formal model to reconstruct Friedrich Nietzsche’s concept of Perspectivism and Will to Power using the framework of Algorithmic Information Theory. By redefining "truth" not as a binary state (True/False) but as a continuous variable of "Interpretative Strength," I attempt to resolve the dilemma between relativistic nihilism and dogmatic absolutism. I introduce the "Strength Function" S(I) = E(I) / K(I), where the strength of an interpretation depends on maximizing Explanatory Power (E) while minimizing Complexity (K). Through this (...) model, I demonstrate that the concept of "Absolute Truth" (God) is mathematically impossible as it requires lossless compression of infinite entropy. Furthermore, this paper invites mathematicians and logicians to rigorously formalize this heuristic model. (shrink)

Kant’s essay On a Supposed Right to Lie has long been ridiculed as a failure of moral intuition, often summarized as a rigid command to "tell the truth even if it kills your friend." This paper challenges that traditional reading, arguing that the text is not a manual for personal virtue but a foundational blueprint for Public Right (Recht). By analyzing the distinction between 'prohibition' and 'non-right,' this study demonstrates that Kant’s primary concern was the allocation of responsibility (Imputation). Ultimately, (...) this paper proposes a new definition of the modern state: Law is not merely the ethical minimum, but the specific domain where the State has institutionally assumed the responsibility for judgment and enforcement, thereby liberating the individual from the infinite weight of consequences—provided they remain within the law. (shrink)

This paper addresses the persistent tension between Kant's Formula of Universal Law (FUL) and Formula of Humanity (FH). While Kant insisted, they were alternative expressions of a single principle, aporias like the 'inquiring murderer' suggest a practical conflict. This paper reframes the traditional primacy debate and argues that the tension is not a logical contradiction but a practical divergence stemming from human finitude. First, the paper clarifies the Normative Equivalence between the two formulations (FUL ⟺ FH). Second, it argues this (...) equivalence is obscured in practice by two forms of finitude: Discursive Finitude (FUL's computational overload and framing problems) and Epistemological Finitude (FH's ambiguity in interpreting the Gesinnung of others, highlighted by a new 'passive relinquishment of life' scenario). The paper concludes that FUL (the 'formal test') and FH (the 'guiding thread') are not competing, but are essential, complementary lenses. Finite agents must cross-reference both, an act which embodies the dynamic mediation of Judgment (Urteilskraft), to bridge the divergence between universal law and particular application. (shrink)

This paper challenges conventional interpretations of Nietzsche's "Eternal Recurrence" (Ewige Wiederkunft), arguing that it functions neither as a normative ethical command nor as a speculative cosmological fact. Instead, by framing Nietzsche's project as a structural "Anti-Gospel," this paper reinterprets the doctrine as a precise 'strategic thought experiment' and an 'existential device' engineered to confront the nihilism ensuing from the "death of God." The study demonstrates that the "greatest weight" operates not merely as a test, but as a combative mechanism to (...) induce existential 'vertigo'—forcing the realization that 'this moment' is the sole locus of eternity in the face of absolute nothingness. Consequently, Eternal Recurrence is positioned as the foundational engine within Nietzsche's counter-soteriology, logically linking the Will to Power, Übermensch, and Amor Fati. This strategic architecture provides a coherent methodology for Affirmatio, replacing transcendental salvation with the absolute affirmation of the immanent 'here and now.'. (shrink)