Tuesday, February 25, 2020


Being as Metaphysics of the Law of Objects as throwing a bridge to the form as genetic life (Expressionism of a solid thought)

 
 



It is so that we return to our thinking of the Heidegger text as Husserl. Certainly, one should not understanding this thinking as a metaphysics of objects, because the round of the object in the understanding or substance is cast into view as the form. Thus, one is strictly warned against thinking this in any connection to analytic thought or the “object oriented” school and the like. Basically, this thinking is much more like the thinking of Dugin. We ashew or abjure any claim to being instructive and so abjure the need to contest the claim that one has merely been “expressive” or such-like. It doesn’t concern us that those unwilling to think should not understand this living thinking. True, this living thinking still moves in the infinity of the awareness of the claim of truth on it. But, this infinity is an infinity which is like the essencing of the essence, such that what stands equidistant to all ages is no timelessness of the mind of god, but this infinity of the unthought. In another sense this means that if an infinity has come before, it can not be that all has already been, since the possibility is infinite and can not be exhausted in any infinity. However, this thinking is form, thus involved in genetic circle, and not a dogma or rule corresponding to a superstition about the case with beings. 


The Heidegger text is a text of a study of the laws of objects so far as it is western. This is in keeping with our thinking which understands Heidegger in terms of Husserl. SO far as Husserl remains with philosophy, then, so far does Heidegger. Substance of the “thing” is visible according to Husserl or the final philosophy, which is Cartesian. Every form is profoundly indifferent to being a form under this thinking. Thus, when reason is thought as something added on, and beyond mere discussion, it is a form in which the Heidegger text thinks the final Greeks, or Plato moving towards Aristotle. Being is but a form. It is true, then, it is factizitat, it is subject matter, it is form. 


In the current religion what stands out is the obvious tendency to regard the fact as directive. Whoever notices the power of technology as fact says as much as that it ought to be so. Observation is regarded as giving what must be out of sheer observation. All observation falls back into a telling of what is to be by saying what is. However, to merely want never presents itself as sufficient to say what is. 


Death in the Heidegger text is a specific form of the phronesis or Socrates. And this is the form of moral conscience as what gives time. This form Heidegger finds in his form of Da-sein. Ergo, it is clear that though the movement towards the mere colors of the thing, towards the “fact” which is no longer phenomena as it was since the dawn of metaphysics, has settled into being as form. But, the form is not what is substantive. 2 + 2 has the substance which stands with the formulation 3 + 1. Such and such a piece of white pavement has the same form as some other ashen piece of sidewalk. This coming forth of the forms out of substance is fluid in its essencing under Husserl’s thinking. Likewise, it is not that in thinking Plato’s animal of speech as a special moment of reason prior to Reason, that the form is untrue to Plato as Plato and thus false. Rather, it is this history that first was the basis that allowed the form to endow man with its look. 


So far as a um-earth and an um-welt is bringing the horizon of humans into the position of the living forms it forms being, as the umbegrieffen, not as a piece of the understanding held in speech, but as the living texture of the form. Thus, we reach a point in our thinking where we can not be said to do philosophy of the law of the object, but we do not come to being as is supposed to be granted by the Heidegger text. 




 


Monday, February 10, 2020



The Cosmetic Separation of the World-View from the Political Postulate of a World Formulation in Existence 

 
Related image



The world of politics or emotional claques of opponents, not to say enemies, is thought as locked into a logos-guided order of Liberal Democracy, understood as rulership by the best citizens authorized by all or most citizens likely, but necessarily, by election contest and public discussion. So far as public discussion becomes explicitly emotional or political it becomes an emasculated or philistine debate of egoistic representatives of factions and their interests under the word of Hobbes: as oft as reason is against man man is against reason. So far as the system of deliberative rationalism approximates to politics or gladiatorial battles of emotion or interest Democracy becomes rule of mob groups. The issue then is essentially the conception of Democracy as rule of the best as a postulate of a foundation in order understood as the basis for various world-views in a pluralised superstructure. The notion that the world views, whether Catholic or Populist or Comunist and so forth, can stand on the base of the logos-decision about  a State or an Administration defensive of a region of social being thought as superior and higher than the base, the mere spirited, thumos or emotional region of the political beings, is the basis for a coherent discussion of all things which hangs in a formulation which threatens to come into the violence of what Dugin has begun to think as a sort of logos war. 
 

The rule of the dead implied by existing orders is one sense of the “cosmetic” for the reason that the release from the authority of the weight of traditions prevails as a backround world power in the general imagination. This imagination at first is thought as identical to reality. So far as the eyes and the understanding are thinking they imagine at all times and stand in contradistinction to the sub-cause of instrument, instrument sanctified by the world thought and given its vital action via the world representation. The easy availability in all quarters in the popular thinking, the power of the cogency of the notion that because a thing was done in a way in the past is no reason to continue to do so reaches a violence which ever swells within the dam of the various great sleeping traditions such as the various sacred concepts of the West. For instance that of the music of Habeas Corpus which has little force of being in the Chinese ear. All the sacred concepts and corresponding gods of the ego arbiter in the form of the pathetic flight from nihilism to love (as in Zizek) flee from the existence of the decision which claims Dugin and with a staggering force outpaces the collapse of western logos. So far as the Western logos given way to mere politics and the idiot sophomoric chatter of the debate club loses all sense of its bare Democratic conception amidst the ravaging of the ego arbiter and its gods the claim of the future on those beings outside the Russian sphere come into an ignoble and stinking morass which topples into itself in rubles. 

 

The expulsion of the world-systems from the society of the social contract based on the Maslow pyramid and the like in its sustaining practical agreements belongs to the region of instability of consciousness which is unparalleled. The pathetic division of love and nihilism which avoids the question of the truth of being amidst the pyramid agreement has a strange tension in the division of the best who are meant to be recognized by the others between the requirements of the low emotional or interest ground of the factional or American politics of commerce (whereby the requirements of what controls the state are met by the military and count as the chief National Interest) and the perversion of a logos-culture in universities divided into ideological interpretations of the sciences or “facts” as with the political scientist Murray or the linguist Pinker, or the sociologist Wacquant (all amateurs in their general postulations which remove from the sphere of their narrow expertise into the abyss). Gross ideological or mythological interpretation effaces the Truth which seeks to claim human understanding in the knowledge of its eyes and understanding as its thought (in the sense of the Heidegger text). Watched by many critical eyes the movement of the internal disputes of the Russian sphere, even if not subject to external words, remains under the seething of a great not to say simply superior philosophical release from, as prepared by Dugin in the presence of, an un-philosophic West. In this sense it should be said that though every attempt to show the difficulty, and let it endow the west with its decision which is no mere decision of life and death or such like, remains the work of those few still claimed by the basic difficulties in their irony. The irony caused by the necessity of the forces and their obscurity of issuance from what is spontaneous as something not conflicting with passions against aims that wish to change the resistence to simple leading ends.