Testing for the n+1th time
April 6th, 2007, search relatedRelated posts :: Testing for the n+1th time :: Testing for the n+1th time :: Testing for the n+1th time :: Testing for the n+1th time
In a message dated 4/3/2007 5:20:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
michael at sandwich-de-sign.co.uk writes:
MichaelE says:
> Testing for the n+1th time.
You know, Michael, that if X(n) is true for n+1 if true for n, and it’s true
for n=1, then it’s true for all n (mathematical induction, a wondrous thing
that virtually defines continuity and smoothness, pro-ducing an infinity
from a small number {finite} of statements, that can take us from the womb
to the tomb, from dasein natal to dasein fatal, from ache to eschaton, from
here to there to eternity…).
All is just strung along.
regards
michaelP
Michael;
You misquoted me from my book: “from ‘ache’ to eschaton” should read ‘from
arche to eschaton.’ *Arche* (”archai”) means the original time and eschaton
the final or end of time or otherwise the nature of Biblical eschatology.
Bernard
Hi Bernard, sorry to have misquoted (and I didn’t really mean to quote
anyway, the phrases just popped out, the joys of alliteration, etc; but I
have been reading your Whiteness book slowly), and what an achingly painful
slip it is too 
The reference to _arche_ and _eschaton_, for me, is more
to do with a forthcoming post concerned with Anaximander’s _a-peiron_ and
Heidegger’s interpretation of his infamous fragment. I’m wanting to see in
_arche_ the still commanding/steering (cf Heraclitus’ fire…) from and
through the beginning (and thus present as an-an-archic, as a ruling
firstness) rather than the meaning that adheres to notions like the archaic,
as something left behind at the starting gate, etc. Perhaps too, _eschaton_
as a futural ruling, as something like a destining, rather than the end (my
only friend, the end…). The vaulting ‘tween _arche_ & _eschaton_ as a
bearing forth into the thinging of things in their presencing/absencing
(be-ing).
ps: I am so enjoying your book.
regards
michaelP
