Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 14:39:28 +0100
From: Henk van Tuijl <Henk.van.Tuijl-AT-net.HCC.nl>
Subject: Re: philosophy and poetry


Allen Scult wrote:
> There's a quote from Blanchot that captures this
> excitement of the philosophical work putting its questioning in motion. He
> speaks of "the search for a new form of fulfillment that mobilizes--renders
> mobile--the whole, even while interrupting it in various ways."  This
> epitomizes the work of the fragment, but I think still misses the
> transcendental reach of "the idea."  Here's Schlegel's definition early in
> the collection:  "Ideas are infinite, autonomous, continuously moving in
> themselves divine thoughts( quoted on 63)." This continous movement is
> entrusted to Bildung, but in the final analysis, it is philosophy, not
> poetry which takes  Bildung "deeper" into the profoundest reaches of what
> it means to be a human being.  This profundity, I gather, is realized
> through the idea as a step beyond the fragment.  This step seems more in
> tune with  Heidegger's intense passion for the education of philosophers
> reflected in his courses in the early twenties than in the more distant and
> solitary wisdom of the later work.

The idea is a step beyond the fragment - but in what way?
It is interesting to see how Lacoue-Labarthe and Nancy 
develop their view on ideas - from a hesitant relativation 
of the fragment (cf. the plural "ideas" and subjective "my 
ideas") to a socio-political manifesto, i.e. _Darstellung_. 

The _Bildung_ can only be found in the "highest" poetry. 
It is however to be sought in philosophy. The artist is 
only able to educate if he unites philosophy and poetry in 
himself. And the authors add:
 
"Pour autant, donc, qu'il est un homme _religieux_" (193)
(Roughly: In sofar, therefore, as he is a _religious_ man.)

In other words, _Bildung_ is a form of esoteric initiation.

The esoteric qualities of Heidegger's later works seem to 
correspond with the _Darstellung_ of ideas. Besides, these 
works are doubtlessly edifying, in the sense that their 
"esoteric concept" as _Wege_  - makes them into _Wege_.      

However, this doesn't explain the difference between the 
earlier and later Heidegger. It is evident from the 
reports of his students that the early Heidegger was one 
of the greatest teachers in his days.

Could it be that there is a difference in the definition
of _Bildung_ in relation to those reports of Gadamer and
Arendt and _Bildung_ in relation to the romantic ideas? 

Could it be that Heidegger became a "romantic" since that 
day - when he discovered that the question of Being could 
not be answered in rational terms but demanded a 
transformation of thinking?

Kindest regards,
Henk



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