Re: Creativity

> Perhaps my question should have been, why peras and not apeiron? Why
> limit, goal, and not boundlessness?

Circa 1924 through BT, I think it's as simple as this: the only way
to give something a concrete definition is to find its limit. Something
shows itself for what it is when you understand its limit. It is only
meaningful if limited. Dasein's possibilities seem very abstract, but
establishing Dasein as limited makes them much less so -- they're inside
a well-defined limit.

Boundlessness is much more abstract. You're no longer among beings.
For Dasein it would mean pretending to immortality. Lack of contrast
saps everything of meaning. There's a sense in which everydayness
lacks such contrast, for example, even if it _seems_ more concrete in
its particulars.

Later on, for Heidegger, I don't know. I don't recall the details, but I
think he says more things (perhaps more interesting things) about apeiron
in _Basic Concepts_. I don't know where else.

--
Christopher Pound (pound@xxxxxxxx)
Dept. of Anthropology, Rice University


--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---


Folow-ups
  • Re: Creativity
    • From: dralfonso
  • Replies
    Re: Creativity, dralfonso
    Partial thread listing: