-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: owner-heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Namens allen scult
Verzonden: woensdag 16 juni 2004 16:37
Aan: heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Onderwerp: RE: expansion
>In part two of Peter Sloterdijk's "Spheres", Makrospherology
>(globes), (3 big vols) is quoted a word of Cecil Rhodes:
>"Expansion is everything."
>In a note Sloterdijk tells that Spengler made of this adagium the
>axiom of the civilizing epochs, and refers to Untergang des Abendlandes,
>p. 51: "Expansion is a fatality, something demonic and monstrous, which
>grabs ... and consumes ... the late man of the world stadium."
>
>
>in the original are many Heidegger words:
>
>"Expansion ist ein Verhaengnis, etwas Daemonisches und Ungeheures,
> das den spaeten Menschen des Weltstadiums packt ... und verbraucht
> ..."
>
>
> Except that behind the imperialism is not late civilatory pressure,
> but the expansion of completing subjectivity.
>
> rdb
>
Well placed words, Rene.
Hi Allen, Sloterdijk's is an impressive work. It has already been
translated into Spanish, but not into English. WOuld be sthing for
Michael Eldred, almost 3000 pages European and world history, by an
intelligent and sensitive man.
Subjectivity unquestioned desires completion, accomplished in
world-limited space
only by expansion into other already occupied subjectivities.
But i understand subjectivity as originally Western, and it is up to us
to bring its destruction, our guilt. I agree when you mean that before
grabbing everything, it is first occupied in thought.
Questioning, by its very nature, preserves incompleteness by refusing to be
reduced to an answer.
Might we say that subjectivities are "essentially" interchangeable?
I think so. But the problem remains: wherein and where-by are all
subjectivities what they are? And if that is subjectity - not only
encompassing the modern man-subject, but also medieval subject/substance
and Greek hypokeimenon, then we are dealing with Being and, if we leave
it out as a subjectivity in your sense, we would have missed everything.
Being is now only accessible as Gestell, that's what i think Heidegger
means, when, in the letter to the student, he writes that most only want
the thinging things and gods, but don't want to hear about Gestell.
Gestell, the Wesen of technique, is nothing technical. It is wherein
all (subjective) stellen, positioning, is gathered, and which does not
want to show itself. In order to lift (lichten) this hiding - die
Lichtung des Sichverbergens - one must see the abyss of all ground,
sub-ject. See that Being IS ground AND abyss. The ambiguity essential.
but did i understand you correctly?
rene
Allen
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---