Heidegger

The conclusion of the discussion of Aristotle’s distinction physis-techne, was that the sense of being
attributed to physis: being-of-itself, is to be thought completely anew in an era of unlimited techne.

Unlimited technology - which, rather than machinery, is a one-sided way of thinking - functions such
that it is not able/willing to allow any other meaning of being than which it knows, ‘is’ itself. Also in
discussions about Aristotle, Descartes, Heidegger. That in the Greek sphere things are said to disclose
themselves (apophainesthai), is explained as if they are performing an action, the kind of action which,
since Descartes, is claimed by the subject. But this cannot be the case, for the simple reason, that before
Descartes, without Descartes, the subject has not yet discovered itself, ‘is’ not yet. Remaining on this
simple level - which is very much advisable - , the conclusion would be, that before Descartes nothing
was. But also the nothing is not accepted by technological thinking.

So one better starts again all over, with Aristotle’s physis as the way-of-being of everything which has
the arche of its being in itself. A tree is of itself. A tree appears of itself.

rene

Posted on Monday, October 29th, 2007 at 2:20 pm
comment | rss 2.0 | trackback