People operate with diverse systems of belief and we can live with this incoherence - Political Theology: Four New Chapters on the Concept of Sovereignty - Page 118 - Paul W. Kahn - 2011 - Preview - More editions In the postmodern world, the...1 month ago
Savitri Era of those who adore, Om Sri Aurobindo and The Mother.
In view of the fact that multiple anonymous comments in a thread make confusing reading and it becomes difficult to track who is telling what and to whom, only comments bearing some name/pseudonym/identity will appear in future. [TNM 011110 SEOF]
Friday 27 April 2007
Re: 09: Her Mortal Birth by Rich
If trace is the essence of Being that haunts language, the problematique is with Speech not Being. Specifically the disclose of Being in "das einzige Wort", (Messiah, Other, Avatar) - e.g. the alliance of speech and being in one word - is that which requires vigilance and "austerity of erasure". Erasure precedes rupture and clears a horizon for the disclosure of the Other /Avatar, and the re-inscription of Trace. But the possibility of this play of absence and presence closes itself off when in literalizing presence (the one word) our hermeneutic agility fails and we attempt constrain the unnameable to a single name.
Derrida on Heidegger:
Therefore, in order to name the essential nature of Being (das wesende Seins), language would have to find a single word, the unique word (ein einziges, das einzige Wort). From this we can gather how daring every thoughtful word (denkende Wort) addressed to Being is (das dem Sein zugesprochen wird). Nevertheless such daring is not impossible, since Being speaks always and everywhere throughout language" (p. 52).
Such is the question: the alliance of speech and Being in the unique word, in the finally proper name. And such is the question inscribed in the simulated affirmation of différance. It bears (on) each member of this sentence: "Being / speaks / always and everywhere / throughout / language." (Derrida)