Thursday, October 14, 2010

Ingredients In Famous Players Popcorn



"economic paradigm" work within the concepts and principles of metaphysics
- above the principle of identity -, understood, according to the Heidegger's famous definition
as onto-theo-logy? The link ontology / metaphysics and the economy does not appear explicitly in
Heidegger's thought, yet it seems to work, so tireless,
inside of his attempt to capture the essence of metaphysics and to cross it.
Based on this initial assumption is possible to trace, just the thought of Heidegger, the question
root of a new issue of the economy. In fact, if the economy goes,
first, searched in the ontology and the latter is not simply the result of
metaphysical thinking, Heidegger's research, which aims to capture the essence of this tradition,
offers itself as fertile ground on which to work, since putting in light of what is and how it
metaphysics, may also help determine the essence of the economy.
More specifically, the depth of Heidegger's notion of identity seems to offer
idea of "economy" one of the more radical possibility riquestionamento of its origin. § 1 The
Zusammengehörigkeit
hidden identity of the general concept of identity are given three basic meanings: 1) what
considers identity as the unity of substance (Aristotle); 2) that considers identity as
substitution (Leibniz), and 3) that considers identity as the Convention (Waismann).
The first definition is Aristotelian. In Met., V, 9, 1018 at 7, Aristotle states: "In
essential sense, things are identical in the same sense in which one, since they are identical when
is one or when their matter is their substance. It is therefore evident that the identity is in some way
unit, whether the unit relates to more things is that it refers to one thing,
taken as two, as when we say that the thing is identical with itself. "
The unity of the substance and the definition that is expressed, for Aristotle, the meaning of 'identity'
(taÙtÒthj). The second definition is closer to Leibniz that the concept of identity
equality. According to him, in fact, are the same things that can substitute for each other save
veritate. The third definition is the one for which the identity can be established and recognized on the basis of any
conventional criterion.
The explicit recognition of identity as a fundamental ontological and logical principle,
next to that of contradiction and the third excluded, goes back historically at the thought of Wolff. In fact
Aristotle ignored the principle of identity and so too the medieval tradition, the same
Leibniz considered the statement "everything is what it is," but it did not confer the status of a principle, as
did, however, with one of contradiction and sufficient reason. Only Wolff
began to recognize explicitly the wording of the identity, the basic principle. Wolff
exhibited as the "principle of certainty", deriving from the principle of contradiction. In its
Ontology (1729), Wolff wrote that it is impossible that the same thing together is and is not and that
therefore, everything, as it is, is.
Heideggerian Meditation on the question of identity seems to take as a basis
whole metaphysical tradition, with the clear intent to follow a path determined: what
ranging from "beginning" (Satz), as an assertion of identity, jump in the "essential source"
(Wesensherkunft) of the identity, to his emergence as the original theme to think about. Under a

Page 2
should read this light, the final conference in June of 1957, the principle of identity:
"Only if we turn to thinking about what has already been designed, we are to be aimed at
service of what is still to think '

1. The identity, as it was handed down by tradition
metaphysics, remains in the eyes of Heidegger, still an open question with respect to the problem of its origin
essential.
identity, collected by metaphysical thinking in the form of a fundamental principle, is
expressed by the formula A = A. This formula indicates a supreme law of thought. With
it is not called into question any kind of equality, like A is equal to another A. If
fact, this was the explanation of the principle, we would be facing a straightforward tautology
as you would say for example that "the rose is pink."
With the same in Latin idem, greek to auto, the thought does not allude to the 'same' (das gleich)
but the 'same' (das Selb). The formulation of the principle of identity A = A, the first thing
puts in evidence as the 'same' (das Selb) is not the 'same' (das gleich):
confuse these two terms mean, in the view of Heidegger , to lose sight of the essential, namely that in the equal
diversity disappears and, instead, in itself, and the diversity is made manifest. The formula
A = A is not only states that if A is any question but that, by itself, if every A is itself
same. In the 'identity' (Selbigkeit) shows an original "with" a mediation, a summary,
a link, a tendency towards unity, according to which everything is given back to itself, is with him. This
"with" reveals a striving towards unity, which highlights a report
within the 'same', able to prevent the unity of thinking as a unit already made, as no uniformity
difference, stiffened in his stubborn persistence in itself.
is, after all, this is the way in which metaphysics, in its many different interpretations of identity,
has considered the unit that is the basis of this concept, referring to a uniform
so hard that it can turn into a real fundamental principle. Doing this, the
metaphysics has not seen the mediated nature of identity, forgetting the original report
identical with itself. In this sense, the principle of identity, rather than say something about the identity
, already seems to presuppose what it means identity.
listening in thought the formula A is A, you can take, this is "an indication of the
how the institution is, namely a determination of its essence. Without the identity of the institution does not
would never be able to appear in his being. The question of identity, in hindsight, then, speaks to
starting from the institution. In
3 fragment of Parmenides, for the first time in Western thought, the being of
comes to language, "to G "The same" (das Selb). In this fragment
yet, the identity does not belong to being, as stated in the rest of the tradition
metaphysics: therefore, the case of Parmenides is offered as a "place" of the original emergence
same problem of identity, as an "enigma" (Rätsel), which is called the appearance
identity, without being told, to know its meaning.
Long before the principle of identity to be made, the identity itself speaks of himself, from the
coappartenersi of being and thinking. Coappartenersi This is made possible, in turn, of being and thinking
from belonging to the same.
While metaphysics, later, think identity, rappresentadosela as an "essential feature"
(Grundzug) being of the institution, the fragment of Parmenides seems to refer to a being from
mean, to think together, as a "dash" (Zug) identity. The sentence, in this way, we
grants "nod" (Wink) in the direction of Zusammengehörigkeit of being and thinking, starting
identity. The Zusammengehörigkeit indicate the 'ownership' (Gehörigkeit)
of different things in the same area that, therefore, is to be "together" (zusammen). This is, for Heidegger, M.
1 Heidegger, Der Satz der Identität (1957), in Identität und Differenz, Gesamtausgabe Bd 11, Vittorio Klostermann Frankfurt a.
M. 2006, tr. com. edited by UM Ugazio, The principle of identity, identity and difference,
Aut Aut (1982), No 187-188, pp. 2-37. The quotation above is on page. 16 ED. Italian and page. 50
original.

2 Page 3
the unthought by metaphysics and the tradition of thinking, wrapped in the enigma offered by the concept of identity
, before being processed in the beginning. The meaning
current that is given to this issue of belonging to and derived from the consideration of
gehören Zusammen starting from, is to be arranged for an order of a collection, a
be included in such an order and have in it a place, in view of the unity of the system:
unit which is controlled by a dominant feature, capable of providing the summary measure of the multiplicity
called into question. Thus understood, the problem of membership is fixed in participation in a systematic order
, economically targeted unit under the auspices of a predominant principle.
The 'possibility' (Möglichkeit) proposed by Heidegger, is, instead, to try to make the experience
from gehören Zusammen. This would open the opportunity
dall'impensato of metaphysics, on the question of identity: it is a think,
hard to let emerge for observation, precisely because of its original simplicity.
More than a 'coordination' (Zusammenordnung), it brings into play before Zusammengehören
all a mutual belonging of being and thinking and, if it is true that thinking is a hallmark
human identity evokes a patently special relationship between man and be. How
humans that calls for a "member" (gehören) being, in the sense of "hear" (hören)
being, well being is, as it turns with its call to man . In this way man and be
are "traspropriati (übereignet) to each other, belong together. This
original membership can not be represented by the image of a
knotting between two items that previously were considered distinct and are identified respectively as
animal rationale, and how Grund, foundation. The man and being no longer
neither the one nor the other to a thought that giving up all attitude representative, perform
the "leap" (Absprung) towards the entrance by a communality essential.
The jump is the entry in the 'field' (Bereich) in which man and be always
have already achieved and delivered to the "constellation" (Konstellation) dating back to always understand them. It
is able to capture this "do-right" (eignen), in which man and being are endorsed
each other. The Er-
eignis is the area - a sphere with fluctuations of its own - through which man and will be
reach each other in their essence, what they get for their forgiveness is essential and, in the meantime, those determinations which
metaphysics has given them. Think of the event (Ereignis) as Er-eignis means working at the construction site where
this area with its own oscillations is costruito2.
This "scope" (Bereich) is the unthought of metaphysics and to think about the emergence of
problem of identity. The word Ereignis is not even mentioned an event: it
indicates, rather, something unique and singular. While
Ereignis has nothing to do with identity, identity is a "property" (Eigentum)
eignis-era, since it originates from the Zusammengehörenlassen, ie
let that be the communality of being and thinking, which, as we have seen, on the contrary
think of what metaphysics is about being a stretch of identity.
identity, re-read in the light dell'Ereignis, loses the possibility of being represented as a fundamental trait
being and, consequently, also disposes of the disguise of a fundamental principle of
know.
The leap from the principle of identity, the essence of identity (the Zusammengehören)
to "essential source" (Wesensherkunft) identity (open-Era eignis)
seems to cause a paradigm shift in thinking. Seizing
mediation within identity, freed from its adventitia principled nature, the
thought, trying to enter the key come, it was placed at the service of what, in the already
2 M. Heidegger, Der Satz der Identität (1957), in Identität und Differenz, Gesamtausgabe Bd 11, Vittorio Klostermann Frankfurt a.
M. 2006, tr. com. edited by UM Ugazio, The principle of identity, identity and difference,
Aut Aut (1982), No 187-188, pp. 2-37. The quotation above is on page. 13 ED. Italian and page. 46
original.

3 Page 4
thought, it is still worthy of thought. In this way, relinquishing any tendency to
representation of the essence of identity, seems to think radically, having opened with
the Ereignis, the "yard" of the construction of his own rise.
§ 2 onto-theo-logy as a dual oblivion of the difference
The present analysis will refer to Heidegger's seminar in February 1957, entitled The
onto-theo-logical constitution of metaphysics

3. This work of Heidegger intends
to establish a "conversation" (Gespräch) with Hegel, identifying as "matter" (Sache)
His fundamental thought, thought as such "in the fullness of being deployed thought-
(Gedachtheit) of thought ( des Gedachten) »

4. Framed within this specific
conception, the problem of being - a topic that, in the eyes of Heidegger, overlooking the entire
question of Western thought - is returned in the form of a thought of absolute thought, a thought
he thinks himself, through the historical consideration of the number of steps, or
'configurations' (Gestalten) that regulate its epiphany and its development.
groped a conversation with Hegel, therefore, means talking about the same issue that is alive in his mind, not
flattening, however, the discourse on equality of contents, but leaving out, just
from consideration of the 'same' (Selb), a radical diversity, inappianabile.
In order to clarify the abysmal differences, Heidegger focuses on three fundamental aspects
for possible comparison:
1) The matter of thought (Sache des Denkens): for Hegel, the question of thought is being seen
in relation all'esser-thought entity in absolute thought. For Heidegger, the question
of thought is being seen in relation to its uniqueness (differentiation) by the body.
2) The measure for the interview with the history of thought for Hegel, the measure for the interview
with the history of philosophy is determined by the ability to capture, in what
preceding thinkers have thought, energy and strength, yet the validity of their content,
key moments of development to elevate the spirit, within the framework of its maturation in
absolute thought. For Heidegger, it is to enter into conversation with the
predecessors, trying to get new life by their thinking, not what they are
already been thought, but on the contrary, from everything that was
unquestionable, it still offers, hard, to think about. In this sense, the thought passed, more than
be inserted in a process of continuous evolution and overcome
themselves, they must be bailed out in his "already-been" (Ge-wesenes), that in coming a collection
(Ge-) of what, in it, there is a critical (Wesen) and that the tradition did not think
explicitly.
3) The nature of the conversation with the previous history of philosophy: Hegel takes the form of a
super " (Aufhebung), for Heidegger, is determined as the "step back" (Schritt zurück
).
Make the "step back" means going in the direction of the unthinkable by metaphysics, namely
to quell '"context" (Bereich), from which the essence of truth is "worthy of being thought
(denkwürdig). The step back, then, goes by the 'unexpected' (Ungedachten)
to what is "da-thinking '(das zu-Denki). But this unexpected hiding and takes in Serbia, in turn,
something that the metaphysical tradition seems to have forgotten. With the setback,
proposed by Heidegger, in reality is thought to have to do with the story of a dual oblivion.
The difference between being and body, to which the truth, understood as the ¢ 'qeia, that is as game
veiling (the "qh) and revelation, the experience seems to attest, is not really ever thought
3 M . Heidegger, Die onto-theo-logische Verfassung der Metaphysik (1957), in Identität und Differenz, Gesamtausgabe Bd
11, Vittorio Klostermann Frankfurt a. M. 2006, tr. com. edited by UM Ugazio, the onto-theo-logical constitution of metaphysics
in Identity and Difference in Aut Aut (1982), No 187-188, pp. 2-37.
4 Ibid, ed. com. cit., p.. 17; the original page. 53.
4
Page 5
the metaphysical tradition, while being experienced by it. Less than ever is meant the difference
as such or the same area of the unveiling of happening.
The story of this double neglect does not arise from his being an oversight of human thought, but
presented by Heidegger as a necessary treatment of the history of Being. Since this story
coincided, in Western thought, with the development of metaphysical thinking, which, on
it has built its essential foundation, then take the step back means, first of all
, from metaphysics to set off back towards its "essence" (Wesen)
and its "essential source" (Wesensherkunft): the difference between being and being, as
'quotas' (Bezirk) of the essential development of metaphysics, the 'field' (Bereich)
the same difference as come its original essence.
If, in fact, the history of metaphysics has deployed its course as a 'history of lighting'
(Lichtungsgeschichte) of being, ie as a succession of ages to come of his presence in the game
delay between being and body, opening the scope of this
same game, by trying to step back, can not have one size epochal or historical, from
because it must offer itself as an essential source - a-historical - the root of any age
being. The setback means, therefore, a path from the metaphysical essence of metaphysics
, until it came from astoricità essential.
The essence of metaphysics is offered, therefore, first, the thought, the question as "more worthy of being thought
" (das Denkwürdigste). Such a core has, since the beginning of its history,
a dual character: on the one hand, it is offered as ontology, the other as theology. This dual nature
seems, in actually result from a single source essential. For this reason, in the eyes of
Heidegger, it is possible, precisely because of the completion of step back,
connote the entire metaphysical tradition as "onto-theo-logy." Such a structure, or rather its essential
come, is what is offered at the thought as worthy to be pondered. Why
the metaphysical tradition is structured as onto-logy, and, since its origins, it's over for
identify with the theo-logy? Heidegger reformulates this question as follows: as the god
could get in philosophy? The deepening of the question, rather than insisting on a
to give specific meaning to the term "theology, he seeks to direct research
essential to the origin of the constitution itself onto-theo-logical metaphysics.
From the point of view essential, it is possible to say that
Metaphysics thinks the being as such, ie in general. Metaphysics thinks the being as such, ie
in its entirety. Metaphysics thinks the being of beings as the unit of what is more general, or of what is
valid everywhere, is that research units of the fund, as the unity of all, that is what lies at the Above all, unity is
giustificante5 foundation.
With these words, Heidegger shows the only root that gives life to the breakdown of metaphysics
into two main branches, in fact, closely related as thought
entity as such, that "in general" (im Allgemeinen), the metaphysics is ontology, but as a thought entity
"in its totality" (im ganzen), metaphysics and theology. In both cases it is an underlying problem
"unity" (Einheit) in the first sense, as the unit of that which, being more general, is valid everywhere,
in the second sense, as the unit of what is above all and, as such, all of this,
can provide justification.
The problem of 'unity "(Einheit) form, at the root of both these branches,
need and a search for" foundation "(Grund): Now, on the basis of a general validity, now
from a superiority over the rest. In this sense, the whole metaphysical, given the complexity of its dual
joint, is a "base" (gründen) that, at every step, makes
5 M. Heidegger, Die onto-theo-logische Verfassung der Metaphysik (1957), in Identität und Differenz, Gesamtausgabe Bd
11, Vittorio Klostermann Frankfurt a. M. 2006, tr. com. edited by UM Ugazio, the onto-theo-logical constitution of metaphysics
in Identity and Difference in Aut Aut (1982), No 187-188, pp. 2-37. The passage quoted is on page. 27 ED. com.
and pp. 65-66 EDA. original.

5 Page 6
account of its foundation and that, ultimately, asks that its very basis is justified.
Compared to the dual designation of ontology and theology, the prefixes "onto-" and "theoretical", and what principles
recent references, refer to this dual requirement of the foundation, now in the sense
existence of a supreme body, now through the identification of this entity with high a god.
The suffix "-ology", common to both forms of the foundation, does not so much logic in the sense of science
rules of discourse, but rather, "the sum of a set of relationships established
-justification in which the objects of science are represented, namely
grasped conceptually, in reference to their foundation "

6. In this way, ontology and theology
and, therefore, metaphysics as a whole, aware of being as the foundation of the institution.
The suffix "-ology" refers to that ordered system, governed by a principle to which Heidegger gives the name
of 'constellation' determined the presence and come to that, as we shall see, effectively, Reiner Schürmann
renamed "economy of presence", in relation to essential
game between being and referral agency, suggested the idea of Heidegger's ontological difference, which
fundamental matrix, acting in the whole history of metaphysics.
In metaphysics the way in which being is essential to show is the foundation of this statement
specific mode of presence is precisely the continuous reference to the prevailing lÒgoj or to
lšgein, understood by Heidegger, even more than "say "in the original sense of" gathering ".
In this sense, the central question of thought, metaphysics, coincides with the search
foundation, and then shifts to the need for a 'first foundation' (prèth ¢ rc), as presented
causa sui, that is identified as a god . This means that metaphysics is not theology and then also
ontology, but it is, in fact, theo-logical, because they are essential onto-logical and ontological
because, at root, theological, that is always looking
being as the foundation of the institution and is, essentially interpreting the always be like a body high in
able to justify, as first principle, the existence of everything.
Since ontology and theology are not operating within the two disciplines
metaphysics as a standalone, the greatest difficulty for thought lies in highlighting the 'unity "(Einheit) in
from which both' belong a common framework (zusammengehören), or the
"essential source" (Wesensherkunft) of that unit. Indeed, it is the drive
entity as such, in its overall size and in its ultimate size, which, in the eyes of Heidegger,
is founded on the constitution of the essence of metaphysics.
step back, tempted by Heidegger, takes place as the possibility of 'place' (erörtern)
the question on the essence of metaphysics in the direction of its origin, meaning
rethink the ontological difference, starting perhaps from his . Designed
through, allows one to think the ontological difference being only in its difference
by the institution and, in turn, the body differ only in his being. Do not ever be separate entity and avoid
means to represent the difference as a relation between elements
previously separate, making it impossible to reduce to their original coappartenersi artificial product
intellect. The ontological difference, in fact, is not the result of the action of thought is almost
is an addition and a distinction of different elements, made by a power
cognitive representation. That this is so is evidenced by the fact that every time the thought of looking
having to do with the difference it turns out, have always been involved in it

7.
think the difference is, leave the question of thought - the difference being -,
reopen the thought of a new confrontation with what, precisely because of its proximity
so close, it appears, in fact, as the most difficult to think. This comparison with what is most
close and, as such, requires a distancing and a new location by the
thought is fulfilled in the form of a thought 'without purpose' (gegenstandslos), which means the
a thinking that is beyond any "represent" (vor-stellen) and any 'base'
6 Ibid, ed. com. cit., p.. 27; the original page. 66.
7 About this "already" difficult to understand, Heidegger refers to the tale, the Brothers Grimm,
the hare and the hedgehog.

6 Page 7
(begründen). The setback takes place in the thought of this as being different and being,
no longer viewed as separate elements.
"Being that it is the institution 'means a" passage "(Übergang) in the direction of the institution.
This step does not mean, however, the abandonment of a place previously occupied by the
be the achievement of another location, as if the institution initially be free, it only receives
later, being almost run over by it. Is clearly a game
movement, a movement that is to be understood as a change of place. The passage indicates,
rather, an action of revelation institution, which more than a point of arrival, should be thought of as the
seek refuge in the 'non-veiling "(A-Verborgenheit), or in' ¢-l 'qeia. The
differ by institution and be talking about the game of concealment and non-hidden, open the
truth. Within this game there and the entity being different from the 'same'
(Selb): This "between" (Zwischen), and body are to be held facing each other, in
svelante-veiling "referral" (Austrag) both. The
Austrag is the point of transition in the entity and the entity being being. In that period, the
aus-prefix indicates the direction to continue until all the action expressed by the verb tragen
which means "lead" is a austragen lead to the conclusion that remains aware of distances,
a push, until 'extreme exhaustion, the tension between the two terms, originally united in their
convergence of their separation. In their different, and body are brought
be in the 'light' (Lichtung) the original call to one another.
The way in which being is given is determined each time by the way it lights up, that is the presence
. This mode of presence in the history of metaphysics has taken every time a
specific and unique "fingerprint of destiny" (geschickliche Prägung), offering himself as FÚsij,
LÒgoj, `/ En, 'IDSA,' Enšrgeia. For each fingerprint is always a certain interpretation
- economic - of the institution as such.
The setback allows us to think the ontological difference, not just from game
veiling-unveiling, but think of the difference as such in the "location"
(Erörterung) of its "referral" (Austrag). It is the melting of the double oblivion, until
back to the 'field' (Bereich) of its essential to come, understood as "place before"
(Vor-Ort) the essence of the difference. The "referral" (Austrag) begins the history of metaphysics and
dominates the ages, remaining in an oversight that, in turn, deprives
.
So rethought in terms of referral, the difference between being and body evokes a relationship of
foundation, under which the founding - being - is the foundation - the body - come in a voltage
such that, in fact, not only at being cited in the body, but the institution itself be founded, to the extent
they are presented to thought as the 'be more existent (das Seiendste) of all, able to collect
and justify everything that is under the auspices of the foundation unit .
Insofar as metaphysics thinks the being as such in its totality, it represents the being is looking at different
the difference, paying no attention to the difference as differenza8. Whether the different
show how what is more general - ontology - or that it shows how
what is of supreme - theology - however the metaphysical thought result is always the top priority of the foundation
its inability to dwell on the difference as such,
breaking the circular motion of the body and be involved in mutual tension / separation
to one another, opened by their own remit to insist, rather, exclusively,
always one of the two terms of the referral.
8 M. Heidegger, Die onto-theo-logische Verfassung der Metaphysik (1957), in Identität und Differenz, Gesamtausgabe Bd
11, Vittorio Klostermann Frankfurt a. M. 2006, tr. com. edited by UM Ugazio, the onto-theo-logical constitution of metaphysics
in Identity and Difference in Aut Aut (1982), No 187-188, pp. 2-37. The passage quoted is on page. 35 ED. com.
and p.. 76 ED. original.

7 Page 8
The origin of the difference refers to a thought 'quotas' (Bereich) to express the language of metaphysics
which seems totally inadequate. The step back, in fact, retreating from
metaphysical essence of metaphysics, and from this, its essential provenance,
no longer allowed the thought to move within its traditional horizons, making, of
therefore no longer sufficient the words that helped guide the construction of its history. 8



0 comments:

Post a Comment