Justification for the Reception, rather than Speculative Positing (or anything else)
The fifth paragraph of the eleventh lecture on the Fourth Law of Thought reads:
If we assume that the history of Western thinking rests in the withdrawing Geschick of being, then this is not simply some personal assumption we advance in the sense of an opinion that randomly befalls some matter and is enmeshed in a preconceived view.
Assuming doesn't mean presupposing, but it says that we have to take the thing on in such a way that it transcends the realm of opinion. Not because it ascends to knowledge, but because as cognition it is received by thought.
Cognition says what Husserl says when he speaks of a manifold. In the sense that a conjunction is made the subject of a positing. The conjunction is simply something one sees, but since as soon as we try to bring this matter to language we become unclear, all one can say is the confusing thing, but then refer oneself to the simple facts of existence.
Because the cognition is not a knowing, as something ascended above opinion, it is a basic ground of Reason. A manifold or conjunction of present presentations is referred to by the judgment, that is a lamp. The simple rises up into the abstract, and becomes difficult to follow. That is a dumb brute, a bird. Here, in the cognition, one refers to conjunction of appearances. What is crucial is that a presentation must be a presentation of something. Since if one saw a presentation, simpliciter, that would be nothing at all. Thus the indifference of the thing the judgment speaks of from out of the one who speaks reaches towards the conjunction, but never lights as what is exposed to the things.
Whereas Kant speaks of what is presentation, Heidegger speaks of what is present, or presented. Vorstellung becomes what is there as Anwesen and Vorliegen. Because the place of the transcendental becomes the is as the reception of the Fate in the being of being as the higher reason, as the principle of reason which was logos, ratio, and the condition for the possibility. Being, if one mechanically wanted to read the matter out in the same form, becomes condition for possibility. What goes along with this is that History takes over reason, reason is not common to all ages, and that is known by thought, which is never subsumed by reason.
Cognition, Erkenntnis in Kant, is what has nothing to do with knowledge or truth. Something which is ready to rise up form an opinion has to do with knowledge. As in a Socratic examination of the memorey lost to the soul, but which still resounds in its chamber. But, in another way, judgments, at once, are said to be a form of knowledge, yet, they never listen to what resounds, or to what the Fate bestows. If they don’t listen, then they remain something like the god, that dances above the deprivation of the human realm. The human realm, where all are slave to political passions, and make their arguments in accordance with their prejudices and interests. But what is true is left unreflected in its truth, and therefore it seems common to all ages. For example the notion that two things can be equal, supposes the correctness of the judgment concerning simple equality, as of the length of two things. But if it is made questionable, how this correctness stands towards the mystery, the common Sky of all ages is seen by thought. The possibility of the leap in the basic judgments, is like the Socratic movement into the ground of what is to be remembered.
When we ask about, e.g., courage, asserting the whole: it is fearlessness in the face of what is dreadful and life threatening. But, when we look at the detail, is the insensate man, plunged into narcotic stupor, the courageous because he does not fear? One searches into the eidos of Courage. In like way, the thinking into the leaps, that teach us to see what was not manifest, never come to the “ideal”, which is not a concept known to the ancients, or even to the truth, they continue looking in the search. But, since we know the search is a teleological activity, we must not take what is proffered by the Geschick, the subject of the assuming, to be anything other than chance to make the leap towards the thinking of what is called Being, which is always a rubric. Yet, in all this that is stated Nietzsche, most of all, is speaking to us of the Life-Giving Lie.
“ an opinion that randomly befalls some matter and is enmeshed in a preconceived view.”
Surely this is a gift of the Fate, and one can not deny that it is reception of what is bestowed. For nothing random is given out of the head as an impudent claim, but from the inner law of the Fate, out of what the British mind calls fiction, namely, from philosophy, philosophy has lost its deep mooring in the common ground of all the times (And Nietzsche has spoken of these depths comically, of the "profound"--what now is profound in History, in what peaks out of a passing world... but the British, in order to spend the Winter well fed, purpose the crime of treating what is man's own making, laws of prediction and description of things, to put them in the warm jail of the forbearance of all responsibility for Thought, in the content accrual of more devices, external from themselves, from the core, uncertain in their use, interesting, glittering, and soon thrown away for what is just as far from the core. While the Germans have long been Enlightened, terrifically praising themselves for their productivity and economic sense, and their scientific wits, having ceased long ago to have an inkling of Kant's work as anything but "epistemology" for some causal science of pseudo-prosthetics.), but all is assumed out of what lies present and what is ready in that it makes the path to the beings come into our uneasy glance that falls upon the basis of the leap and each leap in the Fate of reason which is the core of the human being, but not of what one is.