Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 18:20:10 +0100 Subject: Re: Gelassenheit and Geschichte From: michaelP <michael-AT-sandwich-de-sign.co.uk> rene considering the greeks immersion in physis: > Then, the search for what that is, is the *same* as the search > for the being of the station, or as the search for Gelassenheit, > which, not arbitrarily, ends with the one-word-fragment of Heraklitus: > Angibasie. And therefore allows no longer of comparing representation. rene, letting things be the things they are being (in their emergency and submergency), and, (not) willing not-willing (not) in order for beings just to be, is as you say, surely not anything to do with re-presentation or willing but can not come for us moderns except by way of such representation and will. Is this non-problem (it is not a problem since that involves something to be dis-solved, nihilated {finding a solution} rather than deepening the question, the questioning of which makes us human) not the same as the not-taking of no sides that I have been trying to think under the rubric of "peace"? Gelassenheit is only difficult to conceive because it cannot be gathered under the auspices of a concept, it can not be grasped because it involves the radical non-grasping of being(s). Can this be 'achieved' via the language of metaphysics? Can we conceive of the non-conceptuality of this non-process? Can we let beings be without LETTING beings be? I allow the zen garden to come and plant itself in its growingness: allowance... letting go what comes and goes; let(ting) it be(ing). a mite too much wine, but regards michaelP --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005