(Much too whacked tonight to proof through this passage) The eternal recurrence of the same codifies the hierarchical relations of will-to-power. As developed in Division I, the history of the last 2500 years reflects the dynamic of a nihilistic regress. It is by metaphysical design that such is the founding engine of history for the last two millennia. Thus, accepting the question’s ontological priority throws man into the cleared region of the infinitely inexplicable. The open region of the question’s ontological priority manifests via the process of allowing thought to breach into the nonfoundational a/byss. This `passage, this movement of transition, acts to suspend the answers which reify thinking qua foundational thought. Hence, the realm of the question’s ontological priority is a region of mystery in the primordial and originary sense of awe and wonder. By understanding the question as ontologically prior to the revelations rendered through an answer’s response, the metaphysical enterprise (which yields hierarchically exclusionistic answers qua valuation) is rendered untenable; as the means of securing validity for such meta-postulates becomes exposed as circular in design and invalid through its self-referential appeals to authority--such is exposed as a mode of thinking which begs its own question of validity! Metaphysics does not merely come to an end with the realization that its project of progressive transcendence fails to deliver on its promise. The mere fact that achieving an absolute synthesis of spirit or consciousness is nothing but a mythic manufacture, a myth derived from any specific period’s form of inculcation, does not, in and of itself, slam the door on the metaphysical Age; as one may eternally hypothesize the recurrence of the same through assuming a “breakthrough” is on the horizon [as Christianity, and the Enlightenments notion of modern progress, instills]. Nor does the metaphysical epoch render itself bracketed and concluded with the realization that the Age of technology advances the oblivion-of-Being via the technological manipulation of beings as static representations of utility. We cannot even say that metaphysics ends because we realize the fable-like myth of our history and how no authentic way exists for securing “true” solutions via the metaphysical paradigm [Nietzsche]. The mere realization that we have been sleepwalking and have no solution or promise for self-conscious transcendence via metaphysics does not release us from the more telling and abysmal meaning inherent to Nietzsche’s proclamation of the eternal recurrence of the same and the nihilism such denotes. Rather, the fundamental sign that metaphysics has run to completion comes with the breach into the a/byss of the Nothing—into the privatively withheld region of alterity held withdrawn and occluded by the ontic-centrism of the metaphysical paradigm and nihilism (and thus with the move into the prethematic realm and its alterity relative to the valuatory dynamic which fuels metaphysics and its ideology). It is in this regard that Heidegger’s reflections on technology, and his understanding of the sending of the most extreme form of Being as Oblivion (during the age of the world-as-image), becomes instructive. The short and direct issue here is that when presence is reduced to nothing but an ontic projection of extant presence, the reduction, when fully carried to its logical and nihilistically extreme conclusions, releases the elemental aspects of all things in their difference as the `same [η αυτό]. The move through extant entities to the underlying process of energic φύσις harkens to the issue of transmogrification: this is the first law of the conservation of mass and speaks to Einstein’s equation E = mc2. In effect, the mass of ontically defined beings reflects the mass of matter, this to the occlusion of the energic relation of what reseeds with the `face’ or presentational `image’ of the thing in its extant, i.e., manifest, presence. The imposition or insistence of valuatory significance upon beings sets beings present in their objectively delimited representations and thus occludes and conceals the process of `becoming via the all-inclusive imposition of presence as such enframes beings in a stasis of extant being. This aspect of the ontological difference, whereby the energic/active presence of beings in their effulgence is covered over and usurped by the imposition of rendering beings static as extent objects, speaks to the Being-Becoming dynamic. Unlike our previous analysis of the ontological difference, whereby the nil of the Nothing is concealed by thinking’s metaphysical assumption of beings as ontical entities, here the Being-Becoming association is ontological at bottom. Metaphysics assumes this relation as an oppositional disjunctive. However, when understood ontological, Being and Becoming disclose themselves as a form of what Parmenides understands as `the same [η αυτό]. As beings open into the abyss of the Nothing, the over-and-against of the op-posit vanishes, thus allowing beings to still in their ontic placement.133 Such a stilling simultaneously opens the gateway to that which remains concealed via the stasis of third-level objectification, i.e., via their presence as suppositionally valuated extant [ontic] entities.** Beings, once allowed to still, `let go’ into the open free play of their ontological immediacy and begin to `shine. Thus, as beings still in the freedom gained vis-à-vis the vertically imposed third-level valuatory ligatures previously mandated through metaphysical enframing, they display that which has remained privatively concealed by the reified stasis of their previous [traditional] station [ἀ-λήθεια]. --FOOTNOTES-- 133. Within the prethematic opening of the Nothing (i.e., the ab/grund that grounds), there is no relation of coordinate space. Without such spatial associative relations as such might be relative to the phenomenal background, objectification is impossible; as the `placement’ by which the `there’ of things in their extant presence might be defined is absent. The everywhere and nowhere of the Nothing’s abyssal expanse disallows any such objective placement. Similarly, just as the Nothing is experienced and is phenomenal, so too is it with this stilling of beings (and the shining they exhibit). This transmogrification appears to be an effulgence of energy via how matter is opened to its ownmost way-of-Being and speaks to understanding E = MC2 as MC2 = E. Hence, we again come to find how Heideggers notion of der Kehre holds sway relative to the Transition. ** The relations of the three levels of abstraction-to-meaning are developed below. (A Single Star in Sight: Post-Metaphysical Transition (c) 2011 (P) 2012 Deno Canellos; Beyond the capacity, ArtifexAstrum (10°=1□))
Posted on: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 03:45:57 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015