road (suppl.)
July 30th, 2006, search relatedRelated posts :: road (suppl.) :: road (suppl.) :: road (suppl.) :: road (suppl.)
________________________________
Van: heidegger-bounces at soca.ecu.edu.au namens michaelP
Verzonden: zo 30-7-2006 15:55
Aan: Discussions pertaining to the philosophy of Martin Heidegger
Onderwerp: Re: road (suppl.)
mP:
> ren, on the road again:
ren:
> > Now that it is clear that we are all Jews - homeless - , it should be
>> said to us that one wander
>> on the road which is to be begun, goes from Hannah Arendt’s preface of Past
> and future, via the
>> socalled holocaust, to Spinoza, the thorned one, and from there to Christ.
>>
>> to Christ, not to Christendom.
>> why not make a next step?
>>
>> Spinoza had the glass in his lungs.
>> Hölderlin, very late, speaks of himself of having become “untrüglich
> Kristall”,
>> crystal without falsity.
>> Logos is collection in order to see. Through “glass”. Purification
> (Erläuterung) is
>> necessary, because one false gesture is fatal. Quod demonstravit Spinoza
> more geometrico.
mP:
> Rene, glass engenders refraction (bending), reflection (returning) and
> transparency (is seeing through, seeing as such?) and even if faultless in
> itself it surely does not render things purely even in the collecting
> lightning (enlightening) flash of the logos; the lens pro-duces the image
> (and a lens flare) for the seeing eye/thinking I — however crystally
> clearly brilliantly perfectly, the glass is techne, no? Whence the
> purification, the making pure? Why do things need to be purified? Is this
> purification what Nietzsche means by will-to-power (making simple
> {dissimulation} in order to…)?
>
> re-gards
rene:
> Michael, you are managing glass. It is the gesture, he who holds it, which
spoils the glass.
OK Rene, while I’m here managing the glass, what non-gesture does not spoil
the glass? Is not seeing/thinking clearly only one mode of seeing/thinking?
Is not a non-gesture another gesture? If everything is “spoilt” one way or
another (in seeing clearly, in seeing murkily, in seeing in low light, in
seeing in blinding light, in seeing projections, etc) then why can we not
dispense with spoilation and purity alike?
ps: Thurber once said that he thought he was seeing his own eye when looking
down a microscope at (apparently) some plant cells (at school).
regards through a glass darkly
michaelP
> it is clear whereto the reflection points.
see Thurber above…
____________________
Michael
i see with sympathy that you are trying to escape, because more darkness
is precisely what is needed.
“Ja, mein Herr! Sie sind ein Dichter!” achselzuckt der grüne Vogel Specht”
(Liedern des Prinzen Vogelfrei)
keep it up,
rene
“Wir sind die Holländer”
___________________________
heidegger mailing list
heidegger at soca.ecu.edu.au
