northanger (northanger) wrote,
northanger
northanger

uber uns kommen

pondering dread reading Heidegger's What is Metaphysics? .... what is it? ironically, the last few days been trying to get a hold of something. periodically ambulating to kitchen to formulate plan to reveal whatever it is that's percolating. shooting down lots of plans cos, if i can precisely formulate the question then aren't i presupposing the answer? reading WiM i'm going, that's it, that's it, that's it... Can there ever be a search without an anticipation, a search that would end in pure discovery? — but did not fully get dread (this was before finding out where i first read Auseinandersetzung).

Dread reveals the nothing ... Dread reveals open-ness ... So dread appears to be an arbitrary invention, and the nothing associated with it seems only a fantasy.

vaguely aware of Martin Heidegger when i did Landmark Forum — they're very big on creating from nothing. volunteering one day i discovered a quote book with a lot of Heidegger. this made me buy Being and Time that, unfortunately, put me to sleep. however, found a detailed synopsis online which helped. eventually developing my Daisen thesis (which makes no sense whatsoever reading it today; notepad file: 03.01.02-Thesis.txt).


Light can stream into the clearing, into its openness, and let brightness play with darkness in it. But light never first creates the clearing. Rather light presupposes it. However, the clearing, the open region, is not only free for brightness and darkness but also for resonance and echo, for sound and diminishing of sound. The clearing is the open region for everything that becomes present and absent (Heidegger, 1993).

Everything depends on the step back. — Martin Heidegger, "The Thing" [+]

Translate: "the clearing should not be identified with any of the entities that show up in it," 114.

Pretty easy, but tricky. One has to periodically do the recursive function to clean house. This is why post-modernism is not modernism: it is on-guard against "discovering" the One which supposedly causes the many. If anything the One is dynamic, temporal, & non-empirical; a field & not an item in it. Buddhism offers an interesting parallel. One of its tenants is that the self is a temporal conception & does not name anything essential or transcendental. The believer accepts this conceptually but continues to organize events in a utilitarian fashion, so they are beneficial to me. Or she becomes enthusiastic about helping others. The recursive Buddhist question asks who these others are that one is so devoted to helping? Ultimately they can only be temporal phenomena; karmic patterns temporally working themselves out so that they will dissolve. Language works analogously. It disrupts the silence & psychic equanimity. It temporally proceeds until it dissolves. It is literally the way (tao) that human beings exist. Consequently no item/theory that the process can focus on or propose could possible replace or substitute for the process. [+]

when i first read Heidegger i was unaware (or unconcerned) by the Nazi issue. my focus was on Dasein, lichtung, ereignis, aletheia, alethinos. i guess part of being african-american means assuming anglospherians (of a certain age) could be racist, anti-semitic &c. this doesn't stop you from reading them necessarily. in this case, i grew up with dogs with German names (one named after a tank), so i like the German. recently, i've become more aware, mostly because of Long Sunday, of Heidegger & Nazism (& also Carl Schmitt & Nishida Kitarô). in schneefälle i explore fascism & fasces. looking at it now, Klosterfriedhof im Schnee powerfully visualizes Heidegger's Germany of the 1930s.

while reading What is Metaphysics? googled dread + heidegger (ah, essential dread) & found Narcissism, Nationalism and Philosophy in Heidegger by Dr. Steven Segal (University of Technology, Sydney, Australia). & as i read In the Essay [What is Metaphysics], "dawning", as the basis of attunement to what-is, is made possible by a resolute (entschlossenheit) dwelling in anxiety — not by willing ourselves out of anxiety, but allowing ourselves to be "struck dumb"... i knew Heidegger's dread. when that spigot slowly turns i rush to stop the water flowing because it scares the shit outta me. (isn't it difficult to describe beforehand experiences to people? the blood between the legs, hearing "nigger" for the first time).

Segal describes the relationship between What is Metaphysics? ("The Essay"; Heidegger's inaugural lecture at Freiburg University) with The Self-Assertion of the German University ("The Address"; Heidegger's inaugural address at Freiburg University) & the difference between Heidegger's philosophy and his politics. the difference between an emergent dawning (uber uns kommen) & a political willing. don't know if i'm correct thinking this, seems to me Political Heidegger failed to actualize Philosophical Heidegger properly. can the so-called failures of some philosophers be fixed by a hyperstitional element? eg, The Hypersitional Heidegger.


Abstract: This paper contrasts the notion of "willing" in Heidegger's politics with the notion of "dawning" in Heidegger's philosophy. It argues that, in the political text, the attunement of Dasein to what-is is centred in the notion of Dasein's "willing" of what-is, while in the philosophical text it is centred in the notion of what-is "dawning" on Dasein. It maintains that the attitude to anxiety essential to a "dawning" of what-is is not reached in Heidegger's "The Self-Assertion of the German University". It concludes by maintaining that, rather than being attuned to what-is, the will in the "The Self-Assertion of the German University" is attuned to its own relationship to what is in a narcissistic rather than a philosophical way; that is, it territorializes "dawning" as a relation to "what is", and makes "dawning" of "what-is" its "own" in the same way as any nationalism makes a culture, a language or a geographical region its own. In contrast to the narcissism of nationalism, philosophy, as outlined by Heidegger in the essay "What Is Metaphysics?", is the experience of allowing what-is to "dawn" on Dasein rather than a preoccupation with "willing" of "dawning" as one's own relation to Being.

The difference between "dawning" ("uber uns kommen") and "willing" is, as I will maintain, a basis for conceptualising a difference between Heidegger's philosophy and his politics. Allowing what-is to dawn on us through being overcome by the strangeness of what is, is the basis of philosophy as an attunement to what is.

In the Essay [What is Metaphysics], "dawning", as the basis of attunement to what-is, is made possible by a resolute (entschlossenheit) dwelling in anxiety - not by willing ourselves out of anxiety, but allowing ourselves to be "struck dumb" (1948, p. 336) by dread. By being struck dumb by anxiety. Dasein is overcome by the strangeness of what-is and, by embracing the strangeness of what-is, Dasein finds itself in the midst of asking the question of what is [...] In the Essay, the crucial issue is to be able to embrace the nothingness of anxiety and strangeness. For Heidegger, the key to understanding this form of staying in the anxiety and strangeness is resolve (entschlossenheit). Resolve is, as Hubert Dreyfus maintains, the power of Dasein to stay in its powerlessness - rather than attempting to will itself out of its powerlessness or state of being struck dumb (1993, p. 319). It is as Dasein stays with its anxiety that what-is dawns upon it: "There where the danger is apprehended as the danger so the saving power grows". Heidegger is fond of quoting Holderlin. In this context, to be consistent with his philosophy, Heidegger ought to have encouraged the German people to dwell in their anxiety — in their danger and in the lostness of their will, so that they could apprehend themselves as living in the "danger" and "anxiety" of a lost will. For only as they dwell in and embrace the anxiety of their lostness do they prepare themselves for an attunement to their own situatedness, and it is only in their embracing of their own situatedness that what-is opens up to dawn on them. However, the more they will their attunement to what-is, the more what-is recedes into the background. And the more Heidegger can only call for a holding onto an image of an attunement to what is.

Like a psychotherapist, Heidegger needed to provide a "holding environment" through which the German people could stay with their danger and allow the saving power to grow by being attuned to the danger as the danger. But Heidegger failed in this regard. He attempted to will them out of their danger and, in so doing, confused the mirrored image of philosophy with the "authentic" activity of philosophising.
Tags: heidegger
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

  • 11 comments