The Accidental, according to the sense stimulated by the neo-scholasticism of Brentano
In addition to the three previously listed foldings, Aristotle here gives a fourth, which he in fact mentions first-the όν κατά συμβεβηκός the accidental being. Συμβεβηκός
accidental [zufällig]; this is a remarkable translation. The translation actually follows the Greek literally, yet it does not hit upon the true Aristotelian meaning. The accidental is indeed a συμβεβηκός, but not every συμβεβηκός is accidental.
The “accidental”, is, according to the teaching of Aristotle, almost the truth. That Priam was the father-in-law of Helen can be read from his person, in the sense that one says, there is the father-in-law of Helen, the shameless one, or, Helen, the pride of women. This which moves is by chance, and not held in what must be. Yet, thought rightly, it is what Priam was, and so it was to be by the boule, or plan, of Zeus, if, Zeus is but a different grammatical case of Dios. Of the highest god. The accidental moves in constant and unlimited waves, radiating most perceptibly in those natures which Fate has cast into the abyss of what breaks and deviates from the one, insofar as it is great. For instance, as dramatized in the legend of the Fate of Oedipus, whose death was said to “bring a boon”.
It is always possible that in this thinking we must consider the mind of Zeus to be the place of the “material”. What is being in the being is the tradition as much as the confusion which rises when the tradition becomes available. Most of all, the objectified object is guiding the truth, such that the peculiar dunamis in the age where cybernetics hold sway, loses itself in tradition, as though the seventeen to twenty thousand year period prior to the age of Plato would return and swallow time. In this sense the text called Heidegger lays down the word of dramatist von Kleist: "I step back before one who is not yet here, and bow, a millennium before him, to his spirit."
In this, in the region of the accidental, the will to will does not throw open its doors to the presupposition, but, rather, to the storm of all truths. Even in the strata where one thinks the material, the word of the dramatist Heiner Müller recalls us to Nietzsche’s teaching: Aufenthalt im Material, living in the material. What material says here, we must not yet pound out in iron, but Aristotle speaks this as the answer to Plato’s question: What is the eidos?