Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1998 10:50:55 -0800
Subject: Re: What is concealing?


Michael:

Thank you for your response to my question on the issue of
"concealing".  Could I conclude the following from what you have
said?    

Concealment is a form of precluding the dimension of openness (i.e., a
closing-off).  

And, the gray-area between that which is revealed and that which is
concealed is a part of the revealing/concealing (i.e.,
coming-into-view/falling-out-of-view).  

What happens to that which falls-out-of-view (i.e., the concealed)? 
And, can what has fallen-out-of-view come back-into-view as it was?  

What is the motivation behind the coming and falling-away?  Is this
where the issue of “care” comes in?  

Sincerely,

Mark Hill


Michael Eldred wrote:
> 
> Cologne, 05 November 1998
> 
> Mark E. Hill schrieb:
> > Dear Heideggerians:
> >
> > I was wondering if someone might have a good understanding as to what is
> > the basis to the concealing phenomenon Heidegger speaks about.  In other
> > words, what is "concealing," what role does it play, and how does it
> > relate to our temporal understanding of things?  Any help on this would
> > be greatly appreciated.
> 
> Mark, "concealing" plays a big role, along with its twin, "revealing"
> (enthuellen), which latter occurs throughout SuZ.
> 
> Both are situated in the problematic of the truth (a-laetheia) of being, and the
> truth of being, in various guises, is the guiding question for H. from beginning
> to end.
> 
> In SuZ it is in the first place a matter of beings showing (revealing)
> themselves of themselves. Such revealing is the precondition for them being
> understood by Dasein, both ontically (it's a hammer) and in their being (a
> hammer is good-for...).
> 
> But beings can also reveal themselves, ontically or ontologically, in a
> distorted way, or not at all, in which latter case they are concealed. An
> exammple of beings concealing their being (i.e. ontologically) is that things
> appear as substrates with properties, thus concealing their being as
> being-good-for... something or other in Dasein's existence.
> 
> Everything that _is_ needs a (unified) dimension in which it can reveal or
> conceal itself _as a being_. This dimension is the openness of a-laetheia, i.e.
> revealedness (decryption). Without this dimension (which conceals itself) there
> would be no beings at all and no understanding of being on the part of Dasein,
> and also no Dasein.
> 
> This is all very streamlined and thus simplified, but may get across the crucial
> guiding thoughts which draw H.'s thinking on.
> 
> Michael
> _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-  artefact text and translation _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
> _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- made by art  _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
> http://www.webcom.com/artefact/ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ artefact-AT-t-online.de-_-_
> _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ Dr Michael Eldred -_-_-_
> _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
> 
>      --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---


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