Professional Documents
Culture Documents
of chaos.
This is why the figure of Christ can serve you as a metaphor, as much for
Spinoza as for Bartleby the scrivener. Just as it is constantly sub-jacent to
the way in which Heidegger describes the "nostos", or the endurance of
Hlderlin. It's that your general logic of fluxes is like a version without
pathos of what Heidegger describes as the liberty of the Open.
Finally, the decision to think Being, not as simple unfolding, neutral, entirely
actual, with no depth, but as virtuality constantly traversed by actualisations;
the fact that these actualisations are like the populating of a cut (cut of the
plane of immanence for you, cut of beings for Heidegger); all that entails a
logic of reserved power, that I think is common, in this century, to Heidegger
and to you.
My question would thus be the following: what in your view essentially
distinguishes your relation virtual/ actualisations from Heidegger's relation of
Being and beings?
We are here (as when you seek to situate me as a Neo-Kantian) in a protocol of
investigation of your own creation of concepts, and not in what is your most
intimate enemy: Analogy.