-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: owner-heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Namens John Foster
Verzonden: maandag 15 november 2004 5:09
Aan: heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Onderwerp: Re: nietzsche's secret
Nothing more than shedding one's skin. That is what good writing leaves
behind. A translucent skin, dry, a thin white thing, nothing more than
shards, toenail clippings. We wait only for another asteroid to hit our
home.
Other than that there is no apt metaphor - except to say that living well
should be nothing more than being comfortable in one's skin.
Is it?
Heidegger says that Man Dwells Poetically on Earth....but does he mean this
in a strict ancient Greek sense, or does he mean this essentially for all
time?
Hi John,
My, but not subjective, take is: it's only like that when it is said and heard
poetically. So it's not a statement on sthing real, but a saying which CAN
be true. Again: possibility. "A possibility that is higher than all actuality." (BT)
How is that possible?
Only when all actuality/reality is determined by a possibility.
What is the greatest possible determination of the actual?
Blindness that is blind for itself. It makes impotent, without the
possibility to find out why, and therefore it makes furious.
The fury is itself (in its essence) invisible, only the consequences are
visible. These consequences are the actual.
In what consists the greatest blindness?
In judging that only the actual, and only actual things are real, and denying
that everything could, and can be totally different.
But everything, measured by the initial saying, IS different, upside down.
'We dwell poetically.' No we don't. We dwell calculating. And therefore we can't
hear the saying, understand, stand open for: the possible.
So the saying and its said is only true, when it sounds. Poetically. The way
man dwells.
Another saying of Hoelderlin, but not a subjective one, sounds:
"We, we are it! Fruit of Hesperia!"
That's our possibility, and it is a poetical, a sounding one that can only be
heard. It's higher than all actualities and actual scientific statements about
the origin of man and earth. Even while denying the possible and the poetical
- saying that they are merely subjective is the worst denial - they but cannot
escape to be 'poetical' themselves: a hole, origin, the universe, animals etc.
It's all upside down: apes, black holes, DNA: all substitutes for NOT dwelling
poetically. Possibility that POSITS the actual.
(fot Nietzsche, and only for him, eternal return is a possibility: "SUPPOSE
a ghost would whisper in your ear........" Earlier on: Nietzsche writes that
will-to-power, is the last fact we can get down to. Everything is lastly WtP.
But eternal return, as the way that everything is/becomes, is a (frightful)
possible thought. In Nietzsche the possible and the actual take their last
consequence. Once more the actual, the occurrent is held by possibility.
"Where i go, is still road." (ice, that is)
Now that it is completely melted, we have to think of sthing else, think basically
differently, to find, no to build a road. The word herefor used by Heidegger is
bewegen, normally: moving. While all movement we can think of is of things, Heidegger
adduces the older word: beweegen, where ee = umlaut-e. *Making* a way through the
unway-able, where there (still) is no way. Elsewhere Heidegger calls it: the inaccessible,
(das Unzugaengliche) and at the same time the unavoidable, the Unumgangbare, where one
cannot go, pass by. Which only can be responded to 'poetically'.
regards
rene
chao
john
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kenneth Johnson" <beeso@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2004 12:52 PM
Subject: Re: nietzsche's secret
>
> Ariosto,
>
> tympanist [n]. A person who plays the kettledrums;
>
>
> anyway I copied down this _superb_ Nietzsche quote on writing several
years
> ago and posted it once here to your attention. Considering your present
> rather floridic style I thought you might enjoy a retour:
>
>
> CONCISE WRITING. WINCKELMANN SAID THAT IT IS DIFFICULT TO WRITE
CONCISELY
> AND NOT A PROJECT FOR EVERYONE. FOR ONE CAN LESS READILY BE TAKEN AT HIS
> WORD IN A FULLER TYPE OF WRITING. HE WHO WROTE TO SOMEONE, "I DID NOT
HAVE
> ENOUGH TIME TO MAKE THIS LETTER BRIEFER", UNDERSTOOD WHAT THE CONCISE
STYLE
> OF WRITING DEMANDS..
>
> and this:
>
> WITHOUT ANY PATHOS. ALMOST NO PERIODS. NO QUESTIONS. FEW IMAGES.
> EVERYTHING VERY TERSE. PEACEFUL. NO IRONY. NO CLIMAX. STRESS UPON THE
> LOGICAL ELEMENT, YET VERY CONCISE.
>
>
> and from: The Life of Friedrich Nietzsche Nov 1887 p332:
>
> "A PERFECT BOOK TO CONSIDER
>
> 1. FORM. STYLE. AN IDEAL MONOLOGUE, all that has a learned appearance,
> absorbed in the depths. All the accents of profound passion, of unrest
and
> also of wakeness. Alleviations, sun tasks -- short happiness, sublime
> serenity. To go beyond demonstration; to be absolutely personal, without
> employing the first person. Memoirs as it were; to say the most abstract
> things in the most concrete, in the most cutting manner. The whole
history
> as if it had been lived and personally suffered. Visible things, precise
> things, examples, as many as possible. No description; all the problems
> transposed into sentiment as far as passion.
>
> 2. EXPRESSIVE TERMS. Advantage of military terms. To find expressions
to
> replace philosophical terms."
>
>
>
> ===========
> regards,
> kenneth
>
>
> >featureless netizens,
> >
> >
> >I have been reading Beyond Good and Evil trying to shake loose again
> >Nietzsche's propensity as I read it without imposing too much of a forced
> >structure like Heidegger does. There is no systematic philosophy in
> >Nietzsche but rules of thumb and a spur to a way of life that he always
> >imagined as the future of new philosophers. This spur to some extent
makes
> >up what I will call a rhetoric of secrecy, an exilic withdrawal and
> >detachment that gives him the ability to connect with odd readers on an
> >intimate level. Odd readers are like those who find themselves outside
the
> >norms of what it means and how to go about becoming a member of society.
He
> >addresses himself to the mavericks, eccentrics, outsider geeks, women,
> >multicolored wierdo's, fags, clowns, tricksters and other beings of the
> >border between the human and the inhuman. It's oppressive situations that
> >drive one to becoming refined, crafty in creating masks that conceal. As
you
> >know for me the issue here is understanding the basis for being
innovative.
> >Here it is finding oneself as not being fit or cut to the measure of what
> >constitute the governing standards of normality. We are monsters in the
eyes
> >of society, beasts of prey who cannot be fathomed and understood who are
> >constantly under going change and proliferating all kinds of masks and
> >appearances as a cloud of obscurity that is always unstable and
impermanent,
> >not easy to get a hold off. It's a mistake to see in Nietzsche's beast of
> >prey the strong. No, it's the 'position' that is weak, a minoritarian
'point
> >of view' that is fragile. It's the worst possible way to be;-- make no
> >mistake about it. It is making this weak position into the strong one
that
> >makes up the know-how of a great rhetorical strategist. In this case the
> >hunter then would become interchangeable with the hunter and that's one
of
> >things that is shown by V&D in their book on Greek metis or craftiness.
It's
> >clearly not an offensive philosophy but a defensive one involving
something
> >like the ability to take on the markings of one's surroundings as
comouflage
> >and in this way dissappear, become invisible and hidden in the shadows.
The
> >result as you can see is also the projection of of an illusory object of
> >fear, a scarecrow: "Flee into concealment. And have your masks and
subtlety,
> >that you may be mistaken for what you are not, or feared a little. And
don't
> >forget the garden with golden trelliswork And have people around you who
are
> >as a garden -- or as the music in the waters in the evening, when the day
is
> >turning into memories. Choose the GOOD solitutude, the free, playful,
light
> >solitude that gives you, too, the right to remain good in some sense"
> >(section 25, BGE). The last thing one becomes in this will to the
invisible,
> >unknown and hidden, to the virtual; is easy to understand. There is a
> >jamming of communicative signals but the noise of that which impossible
to
> >comprehend. A limit of understanding and krisis of the idea of reason is
> >brought into play. The frontier of border cultures makes thinking stop in
> >its tracks and ponder things very very slowly and this is how Dasein
comes
> >to its ownmost posibility, how we go from the ordinary operation of the
> >understanding to a limit hermeneutics of the exceptions, of those choice
> >flowers that are unique and singular. Thinking becomes an incubator out
of
> >which emerges that which is surprising and unexpected with the breakdown
and
> >spliting apart of a very fertile and phat idea of reason which Schelling
> >'understood' as the absolute A=A, Orphic egg and esoteric BWO. How the
> >krisis happens is through a intensification that Schelling calls
> >CONTRACTION, a tightening up of a hard unit which then as identity breaks
> >apart and in that breaking apart there is the relation that then bonds
> >together a multitude. It's no accident that for a new generation of
radicals
> >it is Nietszche who is our Marx. Dionysus is a shapeshifting multitude
that
> >always operates in secrecy like the weak position always has, like the
fox
> >or octopus or D&V's Greek intelligence. These are books working out the
> >strategic avenues of a new age politics. There is a kind of encryption
that
> >obscures the possiblility of legibility or a hermeneutics to take place
or
> >work out a stable position and point of view. For instance in their
Treatise
> >on Nomadology D&G in Proposition VI are discussing the nimadic numbering
> >number of their war machines. It doesn't represent a measure but a
stretegy
> >of becoming X... : "In the war machine and nomadic existence , the number
is
> >no longer numbered, but becomes a Cipher (Chiffre), and it is in this
> >capacity that it constitutes the "esprit de corps" and invents the secret
> >and its outgrowths (strategy, espionage, war ruses, ambush, diplomacy,
etc."
> >As an example of highly nuanced quantities near impossible to discern of
war
> >machines D&G quote the _Desert Children of Dune_ by Frank Herbert, "He
moved
> >with the random walk which made only those sounds natural to the desert.
> >Nothing in his passage would indicate that human flesh moved there. It
was a
> >way of walking so deeply conditioned in him that he didn't need to think
> >about it. the feet moved of themselves, no measurable rhythm to their
> >pacing." It the strategy of a thief like Hermes when he steals Apollo's
cows
> >in one of the Homeric Hymns, cloud of ink of an octopus.
> >
> >
> >tympan
>
>
>
>
> --- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
>
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---