Yes: a "newness" that "inexorably stamps our age as hyper-ordered,
oversystematized, and yet perhaps capable of another birth", from which is
drawn a table of prospective, retrospective, and transitional categories to
"wrest originary presence" from the epochal "shifts in presencing" discerned
from a certain reading of Heidegger. We are thinking then of the difference
between the "original" and "originary" that Schurmann describes in part
three of his book. How are we to think this newness he attempts to
encapsulate in the phrase 'anarchy principle'?
At , you wrote:
>
>
>Well, ok, but I would add something else: that this "return to the new", to
>the primordial, the incipient may also involve something which exceeds the
>framework of remembrance.
>
>
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
------------------
oversystematized, and yet perhaps capable of another birth", from which is
drawn a table of prospective, retrospective, and transitional categories to
"wrest originary presence" from the epochal "shifts in presencing" discerned
from a certain reading of Heidegger. We are thinking then of the difference
between the "original" and "originary" that Schurmann describes in part
three of his book. How are we to think this newness he attempts to
encapsulate in the phrase 'anarchy principle'?
At , you wrote:
>
>
>Well, ok, but I would add something else: that this "return to the new", to
>the primordial, the incipient may also involve something which exceeds the
>framework of remembrance.
>
>
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
------------------