Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 15:18:45 -0500 From: Daniel McGrady <dMcGrady-AT-compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Heidegger in Germany Message text written by INTERNET:heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu >Tom >thanks for your clarifications. It was not my purpose to misread you of >course. It seemed to me you were asking for a _hero_, Gandhi or so and this >sounds, to my hears at least, very _american_ (superman etc.) and very >_german_ too! >H.'s thinking is, in my view, essentially _non violent_ in the sense that it >is a permanent questioning of _ground_ and _will to power_ (of >_metaphyics_). >Kind regards, >Rafael Rafael, How do you read this kind of violence from 'Introduction to Metaphysics'? Is it acceptable violence? 'It is this breaking out and breaking up, capturing and subjugating that opens up the essent as sea, as earth, as animal. It happens only insofar as the powers of language, of understanding, of temperament, and o fbuilding are themselves mastered (bewaeltigt) in violence. The violence of poetic speech, of thinking projection, of building configuration, of the action that creates states is not a function of faculties that man has, but ataming and ordering of powers by virtue of which the essent opens up as such when man moves into it. This disclosure o fthe essent is the power that man must master in order to become himself amid the deinon here in the second strophe must not be misinterpreted as invention or as a mere faculty or attribute of man. 'Oly if we understand that the use of power in language, in understanding, in forming and building helps to create (i.e. always, to bright forth) the violent act (Gewaltat) of laying out paths into the environing power of the essent.' (Mannheim's translation, Yale, (1974) [1959] p. 157) What is it that Mannheim is translating as violence? I can't give any German references. I only have the English copy. It is the discussion of the choral ode in Sophocles's 'Antigone'. And then the violence of interpretation in 'Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics' 'It is true that in order to wrest from the actual words that which these words "intend to say," every interpretation must necessarily resort to violence. This violence, however, should not be confused with an action that is wholly arbitrary. The interpretation must be animated and guided by the power of an illuminative idea. Only through the power of this idea can an interpretation risk that which is always audacious, namely, entrusting itself to the secret e/lan of a work, in order by this e/lan to get through to the unsaid and to attempt to find an expression for it. The directive idea itself is confirmed by its own power of illumination.' (translation, James Churchill, Indiana, p. 207 (1972) [1962] Daniel --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- < --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005