Subject: RE: Fichte - rider
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 16:55:59 +0200
From: "Bakker, R.B.M. de" <R.B.M.deBakker-AT-uva.nl>




-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: allen scult [mailto:allen.scult-AT-drake.edu]
Verzonden: woensdag 10 september 2003 17:43
Aan: heidegger-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU
Onderwerp: RE: Fichte - rider


Quoting "Bakker, R.B.M. de" <R.B.M.deBakker-AT-uva.nl>:


>  Rene,
>
>  Thinking of Fichte's "I" as an enlargement of the Cartesion ego by means of
>  a
>  return to the Greek unity of being and thinking, especially in Parmenides
>  (as Michel suggests) is I think, very helpful.
>
>
>    Allen, not in the light of the Greek (although they are invisible in the
>    background),
>
>   More precisely: the Greek conception of Being as presence (Anwesen) remains
>   hidden. No: that Being is Anwesen, remains hidden, while it IS thought,
>  worded by the Greeks in notions like: aletheia, idea, ousia etc.  

Rene,

Your "more precisely"  makes it. . .what shall I say?. . . more precise!
Which is the wonder of "To on legetai pollaxus."  Being remains hidden
while at the same "consenting" to be said in many ways--more or less 
precisely(with ever greater precision if you know how to listen to 
how you speak, which you obviously do, Rene).  And so the 
possibilities for thinking-speaking Being may be revealed 
continuously and never-endingly.
In its very hidden-ness is hidden at same time its discovered-ness 
(Entdecktheit), the endless possibilities of putting it this way or 
that, which constitutes the play of philosophy, providing endless 
hours of entertainment while we wait for the last train.  Great gift 
the Greeks gave us-- the gift which keeps on giving!

Speaking of which, I leave in a few days for a month in Greece,following the
path of Philosophia back from where we came (going round and round in 
a circle game). Interesting that as being is spoken in many ways, 
Zeus is born in many places., giving lots of people holy places to 
take care of. 

  Allen,

  Not only in many places, but also every time anew. So that gods are
  never anwesend, present in the sense of vorhanden. Maybe Heidegger's
  word 'Anwesung' can be helpful here, which emphasizes the proces,
  and blocks objectification.
 
  On the basis of Groenbech's discoveries and meditations about 'thing'
  and 'blot', Juenger wrote (Annaeherungen) that the gods of the Germanics
  were not simply there, existent, but only in statu nascendi. And this
  state was aspired during the blot, a smaller and more introvert meeting
  than the 'social' thing, although in both was heavily drunk. To get
  into the right, fundamental mood. 

  Mood, wherein beings as a whole opens up, can be thought, although what
  appears or withdraws is never just available. 
  Whether a god passes by, and what that means, however, cannot be anticipated.
  It would only be perceived, so it seems, when the concerned is empty enough
  to be played upon (H on Mozart), and joyous enough (Hoelderlin). 
  But what do WE know about that? Hopefully nothing. 
   

 Just like philosophy!  I'll be pleased to give them somebody's money.


>The new fundament, for Being/presence, that Descartes layed, can only hide
>the original sense of noein and legein further, because the experience of
>Anwesen is prior to the conception of the subject, also and esp. when an
>absolute ground is demanded. But all the time it feeds from Being as presence,
>which is questionless jumped over.
> Modern thinking from Descartes to Nietzsche is however not an ever more
>taking distance from the Greeks, but the further it goes, the more extreme it
>becomes, the more it remains (invisibly) tied to them, and the more it will
> pretend to have overcome it.


This "pretending to have overcome," the pseudesthai of Logos, creates
a multilayered "covering-up." And  if one chooses to go that route--The growing
invisibility Dasein's true ties puts noein and legein further and 
further out of reach.  It's the inverse of what Heidegger calls "the 
hermeneutical relation" (Verhaeltnis) which properly maintains language in its
diaphanous web.

  It's not a question of choice and pretension. Aletheia had to end, and why
  should it stay? I'd say that this is already enough to prevent continuity
  from Greek philosophy via Hegelian dialectics to hermeneutics to-day. (Gadamer's
  pan-hermeneutics) To Heidegger, despite "history of Being", such a permanence 
  does not exist. And that would mean that the change from idea to perception,
  or, what is the same, from truth as (offering) sight to rightness and certainty
  for a perceiving subject, is not only creating a distance, but is at the same
  time the only (possible) reception, preservation of the Greek. A negative way,
  if you will, but the only way. (Likewise, all 'critics' of the Latin, of the
  fundamental changes it brings to Greek notions, can be no critics, because
  without Rome and Caesar we and you would not even be here and there)
  Moreover, Heidegger writes that the Greeks had no word for Dasein, so what it
  denotes can't be there too. Dasein only originates after Nietzsche, it is the
  child of a postmetaphysical situation, of the necessity (the seeing of which
  must first be learned) to begin one more time, after the first beginning. 
  
  regards, also to the Greeks,

  rene  






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