Heidegger

In a message dated 7/26/2007 12:03:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
artefact at t-online.de writes:

…..As I say in another article, Heidegger insists on tarrying at the
beginning, but this is wholly inadequate. Rather, the ontological structures
unthought by both metaphysical thinking and Heidegger’s need to be brought to
their ontological concepts instead of violently subsuming them beneath the
traditional metaphysical categories, all of which are oriented toward a
_single_
source of power (_dynamis_). Because Heidegger does not grasp that (social)
power
is an interplay (not merely an interaction), his thinking can only beat the
retreat to the clearing of self-hiding and assume a waiting stance for the
“powerless power of beyng”. No wonder the Zen-inspired thinkers of Japan have
found themselves attracted to Heidegger’s thinking.

Both metaphysical thinking and Heidegger’s no longer metaphysical thinking are
oriented toward the one, _to hen_. For Heidegger the One is (the truth of)
Beyng.
Neither thinking can cope with dyadic ontological structures that do not come
to
rest in a single origin (of power).
Michael:
Perhaps Heidegger overlooks too much in Aristotle insofar as he, as you note,
has transcribed dynamis as an arche “power.” He thus neglects potentia and
energeia and the protohyle (ousia) and which Aristotle noted as within or inner
predisposed end (for completion) qua entelicheia. Thus Heidegger’s social and
political view lapses partisan and bifurcated, e.g,
when he notes and upholds the Germanic post-philosphical Third Reich as
rightuously the paradigm of spiritual intelligence: “… All things sank to the
same level, a surface resembling a blind mirror that no longer reflects, that
cast nothing back. The prevailing dimension became that of extension and number.
Intelligence no longer meant a wealth of talent, lavishly spent, and the
command of energies, but only what could be learned by everyone, the practice of a
routine , always associated with a certain amount of sweat and a certain
amount of show.” Thus the uber mensch stands supreme over the collective ideal of
democracy and as the surface ideal of dasein. Subsequently, he continues, ” In
America and in Russia this development grew into a boundles etcetera of
indifference and always-the-sameness- so much so that the quantity took on a
quality of its own. Since then the domination in those countries of a cross section
of the indifferent mass has become more than a dreary accident. It has become
and active onslaught that desroys all rank and every world-creating impulse of
the spirit and calls it a lie. This is the onslaught of what we [Germany.
ed.] call the demonic (in the sense of destuctive evil), there are many
indications of the emergence of this demonism, identical with the helplessness of and
and uncertainty against it and within itself. One of these signs of is the
emasculination of the spirit through misinterpretation; we we are still in the
midst of this process…”
And of course his philosophy and the military approach of Germany proved to
be a cure worst than the cited maladies of Russia and America and he concludes:
“But this order becomes false once we [Germans, ed] understand the true
essence of the spirit. For all true power and beauty of the body, all sureness
and boldness in combat, all authenticity and inventiveness of the understanding
, are grounded in the spirit and rise or fall only through the power of
impotence of the Spirit. The spirit is the sustaining, dominating principle, the
first and the last, not merely an indispensable third factor.”
This identification of power and the zeitgeist represents the climax of the
daseinic exterorization of the via regia to the ensuing catastrophe. Years
before the Irish poet William ButlerYates poetically iterated as much when in 1921
he anticipated in his “Second Coming” the spectre of the Spiritous Mundi,
again as Zeitgeist or the Stoic Logos Spermatikos by which an almighty male
inseminator intrudes on the destiny of world and its history.
Ignored or precluded in all cases is Matter, Mater Ousia that is compromised
as a sphinx as both lion and human, much as Heraklietos fancied the Logos as
Fire. The poet Yates notes: “Turning and turning in the widening gyre/ The
falcon cannot hear the falconer;/ Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;/ Mere
anarchy is loosed upon the world./ The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and
everywhere/ The ceremony of innocence is drowned;/ The best lack all conviction,
while the worst/ Are full of passionate intensity.”

“Surely some revelation is at hand;/surely the Second coming is at hand./ The
Second Coming!/ Hardly are those words out/ When a vast image of Spiritus
Mundi/ Trouble my sight: somewhere in the sands of the desert/ A shape with lion
body and the head of a man/ A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun, / Is moving
its slow thighs, while all about it/ The darkness drops again; but now I know/
Were twenty centuries of stony sleep/ Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking
cradle,/ And what rough beast, its hour come by round at last, / slouches toward
Bethlehem to be born?”
What be this great beast but Its seminal extruded technae extended into
the world and its dasein as strictly in the service of a male singularity.

sincerely;
Bernard

_http://hometown.aol.com/bernx/index.htm_
 http://hometown.aol.com/bernx/index.htm) _www.bernardxbovasso.tdparts.com_
 http://www.bernardxbovasso.tdparts.com/) _http://www.human-nature.com/freud/bovas2.html_
 http://www.human-nature.com/freud/bovas2…)

************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at  http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30to…

Posted on Friday, July 27th, 2007 at 10:10 am
comment | rss 2.0 | trackback