File spoon-archives/heidegger.archive/heidegger_2001/heidegger.0107, message 20


Subject: Re: misunderstanding the statement
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 20:38:40 -0400



----- Original Message -----
From: Rene de Bakker <rbakker-AT-bs18.bs.uva.nl>
To: <heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2001 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: misunderstanding the statement


> At 14:55 3-7-01 -0400, Gulio Blank wrote:
> >Allen, Rene, others,
> >
> >I have been thinking about totality in Heidegger too Rene and both
> >fundamental moods of attunement, anxiety and boredom. Reading mostly in
the
> >fundamental concepts of metaphysics (GA 29?) and in BT from section26 to
70.
>
> Hi Gulio,
>
> GA 29/30. together with "What is metaphysics" ('29) and "The essence of
> ground",
> seems to be the beginning of something new (1929/30).
> There are 2 parts (3 with the animal stuff):
> 1. Grundstimmung Langeweile 2. Metaphysical concepts (world etc.)
> pertaining to the whole,
>     das Ganze. 1 and 2 must be thought together.
>
> GA 45 (1937), 'foreground' (minefield) of the Contributions, seems
> something new again.
> It explains the necessity (Notwendigkeit) of a Grundstimmung out of a need
> (Not).
> Near the end and with regard to Stimmung, he refers back to BT's
> Befindlichkeit
> and simply to BT as a whole.
>

 It's interesting that he still insist on a Grundstimmung in 1937. Does he
mention any further thoughts on anxiety or boredom for say understanding my
reading of the moment that "in its default Being veils itself with itself,
which is the way Being essentially occurs in default, [and] is the nothing
as Being itself". That's from "nihilism as determined by the history of
being" which for me is in the vol. 4 of his Nietzsche texts. Default
(Ausbleiben) as a failure to appear is the withdrawal that has been
mentioned and points to the sense(if this word is appropriate) of
abandonment that he already mentions in BT. Being in its failure to appear
brings out an abandonment that "applies to beings as a whole, not only that
being which takes the shape of man, who represents beings as such, a
representing in which Being itself withdraws from him in its truth." And
more, in staying away and failing to appear, for discoursive judgement no
doubts,  he says that, " there comes to be a relation to something like a
place, away from which the staying away remains what it is: the default of
unconcealment as such. That place is the shelter in which the default of
unconcealment essentially persists. But it is precisely concealment that
remains in the staying away of unconcealment as such, then the staying of
concealment also retains its essential relation to the same place." Language
then persists in its sheltered dwelling when its shows how words in their
very meaning indicate their hidden, secret side as they withdraw thinking
thinking the unthought. But this is all rhetoric in a way, an art of
seduction that Nietzche clearly understood. The eternal return is perhaps
not that far from anticipatory resoluteness that holds onto possibility as
possibility and so is a passive confrontation with nothingness where the
play of consciousness has quieted down, has become patient before the
strangeness of the things themselves in its pure beholding. That's
Nietzsche's sense of hospitality and art then would operate as minimalist
expression which i don't think has to involve the absence of elaborate play
of imagery as long as one knows how to erase the tracks of language so to
speak.


> Now one could go on till "Zeit und Sein" (1962), which drops the 'Wahrheit
> des Seins'
> (truth of Being) in favour of the 'Lichtung'.
> But, Heidegger writes: the question of Being presupposes a determination
of
> the
> being of man (Dasein), this still remains. Because the appearance of the
> question
> of Being, which is BT, hasn't been understood by nobody. Which isn't
> accidental,
> but part of the question of Being itself, which is not a normal question,
> but presupposes
> the hiding of Being, and not merely the human forgetting of it.
> And more: In "The end of philosophy and the task of thinking", published
> together with
> "Time and Being" in "Zur Sache des Denkens", he writes in a note that he
> lost a decisive
> insight, already there in BT, German p. 219: Aletheia cannot be translated
> with 'truth'.
>
>
yep, the words truth and meaning also have a cetain air to them. I don't
like them. I don't know, they are just too tied up with cognitive
theoretical thinking and propositional discourse that closes off any 'sense'
of the essential withdrawal at the heart of Being that leaves Dasein in an
abandoned situation like an orphan if you'll excuse a symbol.



>
> >The aim of finally disclosing temporality as the meaning of care is
related
> >to the question of a total mooded understanding of Dasein. To disclose
> >temporality as the meaning of care is just what makes the whole
phenomenal
> >analysis "primordial" and this means whole or total. He writes for
instance,
> >"If the interpratation of Dasein's Being is to become primordial, as a
> >foundation for working out the basic question of ontology, then it must
> >first have brought to light existentially the Being of Dasein in its
> >possibilities of authenticity and totality" (BT H233). In the next page
he
> >writes, "In terms of temporality, the articulated structural totality of
> >Dasein's Being as care first becomes existentially intelligible". Thess
> >quotes are taken from the intro to II when the question of totality
really
> >comes out. He goes to discuss anticipation and death in II, i and then
> >resoluteness and conscience in II,ii. Finally in II,iii he puts both of
them
> >together as anticipatory resoluteness. Now in section II,iv it becomes a
> >question of giving a "concrete temporal Constitution of care" which means
> >going over again through understanding, state-of-mind, falling, and
> >discourse, the whole analysis, but this time in terms of the temporal.
> >Heidegger is clearly looking for a united total view: " The current
temporal
> >Constitution of these phenomena [i.e. understanding, falling, etc.] leads
> >back in each case to that _one_ kind of temporality which serves as such
to
> >guarantee the possibility that understanding, state-of-mind, falling, and
> >discourse, are united in their structure" (H335, section67).
>
> I myself was reading back from Befindlichkeit to the beginning of BT, the
> concept of phenomenology, legein and noein. And thinking of Malcolm
> Riddoch and Greek/Husserlian aisthesis, the 'schlichte sinnliche
Vernehmen',
> and whether this is the beginning of BT. But if one reads (C). The
> Fore-concept
> of phenomenology (Vorbegriff der Ph.), phenomenon 'par excellence' is that
> which
> shows itself, by remaining hidden, like e.g. the symptom of a disease,
> and because logos and phenomenon are both apophainesthai,
> legein is also basically hiding.
>

where is Malcolm Riddoch? This list is always more interesting when he is
posting.


> But you herebove take the other direction to the Ganzheit, unity of
Dasein,
> of which I, honestly said, hadn't thought, but of course ....
> Being is there, where you expect it the least.
>

yes Rene, don't think too hard, the advent of Being is a surprise, why not,
a passive confrontation, but there is a sort of sober fascination that
seduces thinking. More could be said with regards to how certain art (not
just poetry) revolves around a void and finds there its source of
inspiration. The Need you mentioned above too, i take it he means it as
something that points to not a lack as if one were missing something that
the withdrawal of Being would have fullfilled but possibility as
possibility, no?


> And this has again to do with another Kennethian phrase: the T-echo.
> Heidegger sometimes says, that, if you have one thing, another thing
> might appear across (quer) to it. At the moment I know only of one
example:
> in "Kant's thesis on Being".
> The one thing is the proposition. It has a S-P structure
> The other thing is the subject in its relation to the object.
> The one thing slides ACROSS to the other
> (meaning, that Kant could only take this direction, but not SEE it)
>
> thanks,
>
> Rene
>
>
no, thank you

Gulio of the Blank
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------
> drs. Ren de Bakker
> Universiteitsbibliotheek Amsterdam
> Afdeling Catalogisering
> tel. 020-5252368
>
>
>      --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---



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

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005