Skip to main content

Presence, Ereignis and artificial horizons

Been into Heidegger's 1950s texts partly because of my course on Heidegger, Levinas and Derrida.

Between the Bremen conferences and On time and being there is a rehearsal of a thinking about presence that is fruitful in many directions. Derrida's criticism of the metaphysics of presence and his grammatology - including the central idea of supplement - springs from the idea that there should be something underneath presence and therefore a difference underneath the history of metaphysics. But the attention to the idea that throughout Western philosophy being has been presence opens also the idea that there is something - a destination, an emission, a gift - that seals the metaphysical idea that presence can be reverse engineered so that the very intelligibility of its coming about is extracted. Heidegger distinguished, in the Bremen lectures, two modes of presencing, one that is tied to the concernful approach of physis and another, associated to thesis, that extracts its intelligence and makes it available. The former has to do with proximity, something presents itself with care and concern while in the latter presence takes place as a consequence of a request. The presence through Ge-Stell - the latter - is one where the happening of one's presentation (Ereignis) is already under control as in a standing reserve. Heidegger implicitly favors the other mode of presence and preached for a Kehre, for a turn where we find a way to preserve the right of things to present themselves of their own accord. But he also envisages that presence itself - being as presence - has the seed of the current epoch in the history of being. Once presence is considered to be what being is, it is as if its intelligence can be eventually extracted and there is no alternative for what makes things present than to run away in danger. The turn has to be the turn away from presence because only away from presence this intelligibility cannot be extracted and being can cease to be in danger. It is, and Heidegger realizes, a much bigger turn that would be in order. It is as if the idea that there is a horizon where things appear is already what makes it conceivable that the horizon can be fully understood and its intelligence extracted. The horizon itself can be put in standing reserve, it can be turn into a dispositive that brings about something on request. Nihilism would then have started by the very idea that there is a source from which presence comes from - a horizon that can be eventually be replaced by something artificial (and in then, we haven't seen anything yet as far as the road of metaphysics is concerned).

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Hunky, Gunky and Junky - all Funky Metaphysics

Been reading Bohn's recent papers on the possibility of junky worlds (and therefore of hunky worlds as hunky worlds are those that are gunky and junky - quite funky, as I said in the other post). He cites Whitehead (process philosophy tends to go hunky) but also Leibniz in his company - he wouldn't take up gunk as he believed in monads but would accept junky worlds (where everything that exists is a part of something). Bohn quotes Leibniz in On Nature Itself «For, although there are atoms of substance, namely monads, which lack parts, there are no atoms of bulk, that is, atoms of the least possible extension, nor are there any ultimate elements, since a continuum cannot be composed out of points. In just the same way, there is nothing greatest in bulk nor infinite in extension, even if there is always something bigger than anything else, though there is a being greatest in the intensity of its perfection, that is, a being infinite in power.» And New Essays: ... for there is nev

Talk on ultrametaphysics

 This is the text of my seminar on ultrametaphysics on Friday here in Albuquerque. An attempt at a history of ultrametaphysics in five chapters Hilan Bensusan I begin with some of the words in the title. First, ‘ultrametaphysics’, then ‘history’ and ‘chapters’. ‘Ultrametaphysics’, which I discovered that in my mouth could sound like ‘ autre metaphysics’, intends to address what comes after metaphysics assuming that metaphysics is an endeavor – or an epoch, or a project, or an activity – that reaches an end, perhaps because it is consolidated, perhaps because it has reached its own limits, perhaps because it is accomplished, perhaps because it is misconceived. In this sense, other names could apply, first of all, ‘meta-metaphysics’ – that alludes to metaphysics coming after physics, the books of Aristotle that came after Physics , or the task that follows the attention to φύσις, or still what can be reached only if the nature of things is considered. ‘Meta-m

Memory assemblages

My talk here at Burque last winter I want to start by thanking you all and acknowledging the department of philosophy, the University of New Mexico and this land, as a visitor coming from the south of the border and from the land of many Macroje peoples who themselves live in a way that is constantly informed by memory, immortality and their ancestors, I strive to learn more about the Tiwas, the Sandia peoples and other indigenous communities of the area. I keep finding myself trying to find their marks around – and they seem quite well hidden. For reasons to do with this very talk, I welcome the gesture of directing our thoughts to the land where we are; both as an indication of our situated character and as an archive of the past which carries a proliferation of promises for the future. In this talk, I will try to elaborate and recommend the idea of memory assemblage, a central notion in my current project around specters and addition. I begin by saying that I