From: Capurro-AT-nepo1.iaea.or.at (Capurro Annette)
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 1996 10:52:29 +0200
Subject: capurro/onetto



Dear Mr Onetto,

somebody answered already one of your questions concerning the 
Vattimo/Derrida book La Religion.
Thanks to this person for doing it!

With regard to Lacan: I was thinking about his seminar: Encore, where he 
develops a connection between the feminine and mystic (on the front page of 
the french edition you can see the famous statue of Teresa de Avila, created 
by Bernini (I think!), as she is being "touched" with an arrow hold by an 
angel (this is a representation of an experience desc ribed by Teresa in her 
autobiography). One question I asked myself is, if, according to Lacan, it 
is possible for a married man to take the place of the femine which is 
something Lacan denies, as far as I understood him...

I was referring to another text of Heidegger (not the one you mentioned), 
where he presents the "steps" I referred to. Sorry, but I am now in Vienna, 
and I have most of my books in Germany, so I cannot give you any specific 
data on this (and on other issues...)

As far as I remember, Schwan' s article on the Beitraege was far more ' 
nuance' than his book

Of course you can say, that H. acts consequently to his philosophy... but 
this just means, that his philosophy was open for historical new horizons... 
There is nothing "zwangslauefig" in this apart from the fact, that every 
philosophy that states the possibility of choosing among different 
possibilities, also makes an ontic choice. If he "decides" there is no 
"Zwang" but  just the right to choose between different possibilities. Im 
Spiegel-Interview H. says he saw this possibility (a possibility, not a 
necessity!)  I still think this is a kind of questioning that remains 
"outside" (as if I would question Ott's book, just from the standpoint, that 
he was a second class historian and he was looking for something "great" in 
order to become well known... or Farias, who was as latinamerican very 
disappointed because H. had not time to meet him etc. etc.). You are 
searching for a "delimitation of Heidegger from within". I am not too sure 
if the problem of a "delimitation" is a problem a looking for historical 
and/or philological explanations (when H. said this or that...), which is 
what Poeggeler does. Of course these are things that are useful and 
necessary, but  my question was, if  y o u  are asking yourself about  the 
question of...? maybe the question of the Holy? not only from "inside 
Heidegger" but from "inside the question"! So the problem is to delimitate o 
u r horizon, within which we are supposed to interpret H. He was questioning 
the God of Metaphysics from the horizon of historicity (Kairos, not 
Chronos), i.e. of history open to the new, history as eventuality 
(Ereignishaftigkeit), which is indeed an idea he got from Luther and 
Augustinus and - the New Testament.  Remember the text where he says that 
the God of metaphysics is not a God in front of whom we are able to dance 
like King David before the Ark of the Covenant... (cf. Pascal). H.s 
connections to Theology is something we know now more about (it is not maybe 
"une dette impensee" as the title of a very good book by M. Zarader on H. 
and the Bible states). What I am trying to say is, that it is v e r y 
 difficult to talk about these things, without giving the impression of 
doing it "from the outside", maybe because our historical situation is one 
of "being outside"  and/or because we were not confronted with experiences 
of the Holy. As Prof. Hans Albert once asked me if I believe in God, I 
answered him that there are some things in life that you can talk about, but 
you do not know really what you are talking about until you d o  them (this 
is the case of sexuality, of course, but also of skying!).  So my question 
is how do we delimitate o u r horizon of the question of the divine when we 
are asking this question to H. I believe that we are asking this question 
under the premises of information technology (particularly under the 
premises of Cyberspace, as a new kind of Gnosis, maybe H. was no less a 
gnostic as we are... This question would lead probably to a new 
interpretation "from within" of the Gestell etc. etc. This is the kind of 
"delimitation" I am looking for, when I ask questions to H. Whether or not 
 the Seinsgeschichte was finished in 33... well why don' t you let these 
kind of questions to Poeggeler?
with kind regards
Rafael









     --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---