RE: nietzsche's secret - our responsibility



-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: owner-heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Namens Tympan Plato
Verzonden: dinsdag 23 november 2004 18:18
Aan: heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Onderwerp: RE: nietzsche's secret - our responsibility







Niezsche's Zarathustra?".

You have 4 volumes? The original has 2.
The dominion of the subject is a paragraph in "Nietzsche's metaphysics".
I spoke of it a.o. in two mails from 22 and 24 April 2004 (to Anthony),
RE: will to will (nietzsche 2)

yes four as translation of of Heidegger's two volume Nietzsche which
apparently came out in four volume hardbound edition? My first of two books
contains the first two books of the hardbound edition and it's this :


vol I
1. foreword to all volumes (NI, 9-10 ; these are page numbers to the two
volume Nietzsche)
2. "The Will to Power as Art" (NI , 11-254) lecture winter 36-37

vol II
1. "The eternal recurrence of the same" (NI 255-472) lecture summer 37
2. "Who is Nietzsche's Zarathustra" Vortrage und Aufsatze pp. 101-26



My second book is :

vol III

1. "The will to power as knowledge " (NI, 473-658) lecture summer 39

2. "The Eterenal recurence of the same as the will to power" two concluding
lectures never delivered and written in 39 (NII, 7-29)

3. "Nietzsche's metaphysics" typescript dated aug-dec 40 (NII, 257-333)

vol IV
1. "European Nihilism" lecture course trimester 40 (NII, 31-256)
2. "NIhilism as determined ny the history of being" (NII, 335-398)


My suggestion is that you use NI or NII plus page number so I can see where
you are.


All right. "The dominion of the subject" corresponds to the dominion
of the principle of reason. The explanations to the 'reddendum' of
sufficient reason, the demand to render account, demands an instance,
in front of whom [vor], and for whom (fuer) the account is rendered -
the new, modern subject.
Like the principle, subjectivity remains essentially concealed for itself.
(both understood not as historical but as now ruling)



I assumed you had read this text or a similar one, the last part of H's
Schelling, for instance. Without it, it makes no sense to discuss
subjectivity in modern times.

I'm busy reading Nietzsche and thinking of future thoughts. That last post
on "incubation" was interesting. THAT seems like the Nietzsche I know
because that seems to point to what in English translation Nietzsche calls a
"distended will". There is the sense of an inflating swelling that points to
a Dasein at its ownmost possibility. As you wrote about incubation there it
sounded like it was an insight for you. I would follow that "aha, eureka
moment" so to speak since it is founded on who you appreciate the most ie.
Nietzsche, Juenger, Heidegger; -- and make it yours.

Returning once again to it, it appeared to be even more rich.
Maybe my mortal hearing is developing.




Modern times is the begining of what? Egocentric selfishness?

No, the modern subject is connected with objectivity.
Egocentrism and selfishness, as NIHILIST positions, really start
when nihilism is standing before the door.
Asserting that they are of all times, is itself a consequence
of petty egocentrism ('ego' might be a whole mankind)

Or a complete
blindness of a a network of intentional rays of thoughts that prevent one
from seeing the world around them?

No. Descartes opens a new way of seeing, that entails a new way of being.

Before the modern is what? People living
in the truth?

No. Another truth.
The change of truth should be sthing extremely important for our days.

I doubt it. Epictetus shows often example of how we are caught
in iilusory thoughts or appearances that betwitch us and prevent us from
being present and paying attention to whatever surrounds us. I wonder Rene
if the issue is not perhaps the nature of the imagination and its role with
memory and will and some kind of processing that projects a screen that
prevents us seeing things as they are.

Every kind of truth must have a side of error. Metaphysical truth always
also includes a vision on error. But error in Plato, or in Thomas, or
in Descartes, or in Nietzsche, are very different. The question for
Heidegger was: what is the 'same' in all, but not by comparison and
abstraction, but by following metaphysical thinking till its very end:
nihilism, and detecting what is needed when nihilism is inevitable.
Nihilism is not only negative: in Nietzsche all metaphysical motives must
coincide, IF he is a real metaphysical thinker.
You once asked: what is the Gefuege? It is what holds and shines through
Nietzsche. Recently i got the confirmation in another volume.


Te risk that i point to is that 'subjective' positions are still doing,
copying this, while now other is needed. Heidegger shows that only
Nietzsche's (metaphysics of) will-to-power explains the ongoing
blindness
and lying as necessary asylums of the modern 'Mischmasch' human, that
is
so easily mislead, that 99% agreed that black is in fact white.
(the supporters of presidential authority)

Imo Niezsche helps certainly but there are many others who helps through
illusion and ignorance. Heidegger was stuck in his own cultural context. He
sounds so limited today where the clash of cultures and ideas from the whole
world is so intense. It's a question of who's memory will survive in the
end. I like the chances of Lao Tzu and Heraclitus.

You think too little of N and H. The limitations are rather ours, and
the intensity of struggles mere gigantism. (puke)

I stay with my approach. I think, if you would read the texts meant,
you
would stop talking and comparing like you do now.
I'm always there to discuss Heidegger's works.


Stay with your approach I think you could follow up all the ways of
incubation because that is a cultivation of possibility and the innovative
artistic approach if not that of critics. The compare and constrasts thing
well that's a complicated issue that those of us who live in different
cultural contexts

which are all already leveled. Osama is a tv star too. Even if he conquers
the whole world, 'we' win.

as if on the border between the same and the other have to
deal with. I like writing a patchwork, mishmash gulash, outsider
schibolleth. It's must be barbaric to a pure European like you but that's us
rough Americans and our pioneering spirit and mosaic. The textual evidence
suggests that Scopenhauer and Nietzsche represent the first flowering of
what N calls "European Buddhism" or "European Nihilism". I'm not *forcing*
my own ways here or creating a confusing mishmash. It's already there in
Schop and N Rene.

That's right. There's no Germany, no Europe, and therefore also no
America. Only the names still work, like guns they do. But i'm not
interested in sinking away in shitty swamps and repulsion.
Philosophy is not about the occurrent, so don't hear me wrong.

That Heidegger when it comes to thinking of Nihilism only
sees a purely Platonic context is his blindness to the real richness and
variety of the texts in question.

Why are you making useless general remarks?

One of the great issues in philosophy as I
keep showing is trying to come to terms with a kind of emptyness or
non-being. When Holderlin or Nietzsche talk about the death of God, it is
assumed that we are working through a sense of absence of what we take to be
valuable in our lives. It's the distress of Heidegger's contributions
that's a key or mode of attunement that prepares us for an unexpected
Ereignis.

All occurrent talk, dear Tymp.

Nietzsche says the problem is we feel pity and avoid just letting
the subject be brokendown and ripped apart as a invigorating stimulant to
life that's what "undergoing" means as Zarathustra's path. It's about
letting a tragic situation be. Honesty and intelligence demands that we
question Heidegger's reading of Nietzsche. We no longer live in a European
context.

Most certainly we do! You come from here, and the time is over that you
can fake you've fallen from the sky. THAT's subjectivity and rootlessness.
There's only one thing to do: find back. The only alternative is getting
uglier.

It's a different world than the one Heidegger lived in. One that is
richer in perspectives because there is a constant interference from other
philosophies that are not of European origin that some of us live with today
and so did Schop and Nietzsche. Wether you like it or not these guys are
part of Western Dharma. Life is funny Rene when you are intellectually
honest ;-). I'm responding to the truth Rene. This is responsibility; -- to
be true to the textual evidence and not a Guru's interpretation just because
he is supposed to be a big shot philosopher. I say the the thread on
incubation is on the way to real truth and faith in your own way as your own
way. I'll coach you Rene ;-).


Okay let's bracket the truth.

For Heidegger Nietzsche's 'basic' position in NI chapter 14 called "Rapture
as Aesthetic State" is amount to a conflict between two antithetical
directions: "art as countermovement to nihilism and art as object of
physiology" . Now he says , " If a unity prevails here, eventuating from the
essence of art itself as Nietzsche sees it, and if art is a configuration of
will to power, then insight into the possibility of unity between the
antithetical determinations should provide us with a higher concept of the
essence of will to power. That is the goal of our presentation of the major
teachings of Nietzsche's aesthetics."


A real overcoming of one-sidedness, therefore. That's a real metaphysical
aim: to encompass ALL of reality. Truth encompassing truth AND error.
Being encompassing
Even if it falls short, metaphysics is driven by its subject: being.
Heidegger is even 'worse': Being is the lastly INaccessible, near which
one merely takes position. And if ignored, it even rules stronger.
It can do without us! Proof is all around us.

regards
rene


That's it here is start on N's 'major' teachings bracket off the 'little'
teachings for incubators and volcanoes and damms and others overflowing with
life.



tympan

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/



--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---


--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

Partial thread listing: