Lyotard's sublime: the mystery of 'this-ness' "
The postmodern philosopher known as Lyotard discusses in Chapter 6 of his book, including L' Inhumain his conception of the sublime. He leaves in this chapter from the distinction between the question 'what' is happening and second, because prior to this question "that" something happens. Thus, Lyotard: "Before asking what this is, what this means, before the quid, is like 'first' requires that 'happens', quod. That happens, so to speak, always' advance 'to the question of what happens'. The bare blunt fact is that there is anything at all remains, according to Lyotard is quite beyond our thinking. It 'happens' is also indescribable. He says: "What we can not think is that something happens. Or better, easier said that done. " Our understanding will not only deal with this "there happens'. The 'happening', the 'here and now "resists every attempt to conceptualize and so can not possibly be brought under concepts. The indefinite 'happens' to have full eludes our minds.
precisely this indescribable inaccessible to our understanding 'happens' applies Lyotard as the actual object of the sublime experience. This "not in a seat onomschrijfbare generzijds, another world or another time, but this: that (something) happens." Concerns the sublime 'event' in the 'here and now. Where the sublime in Kant is concerned the real or noumenal the world of the "thing in itself" beyond the senses, we see that Lyotard the sublime again, as before Kant by Edmund Burke, radically immanent is completed. The sublime experience of Lyotard has no transcendental dimension. The Kant Edmund Burke recovered transcendence in the experience of the sublime in Lyotard thus again completely disappears from view. Thus Lyotard says about the sublime in painting: "In determining the painting is indeterminate - the 'happening' - the color, the painting. The color of the painting as event, as event, is not definable, and this just has to testify "and later:" Now, " it is sublime. Not somewhere else, not there or over there, not earlier or later, not earlier. But here, now, done that ... and that is this painting. Here and now the painting rather than nothing, which is sublime.
The unspeakable 'here and now constitutes the object of Lyotard the sublime. Elusive for us thinking 'happens' of Lyotard shows striking similarities with our concept of escaping that particular individual other than the traditional metaphysics has struggled. Thus, by Lyotard in that chapter terms like 'event' and 'his' or 'happening' and 'is' frequently mentioned in one breath. There also seems to him than there is a strong correlation between the 'event' and 'being there'. Thus, for example, Lyotard: "It happened" in the first place 'happening?, Is it? [...] Only then will the question defined by the question: is this or that, it's this or that? ".
Now both the classical and medieval metaphysics vainly racked their brains about the specific individual being. Many classical and medieval metaphysicians have sought individual thing from the mind to fathom. The individual being escaped but all these attempts to understand the thinking. The individual did, in contrast to the universal does not capture by thought. For example, Aristotle considered any given concrete individual thing as a composite of both a physical matter and the other being an intelligible form. The matter is that the thing which exists and the essential form is that what makes the thing what it is. The work of Aristotle can be seen that the matter is that the principle of individuation provides. The individual of a concrete individual thing with a particular creature by comparison with any other concrete individual thing with exactly the same form in Aristotle must lie in the fact that the given thing is a different matter than any fragment of the other things given. That matter is a crucial role in the foundation of the individual's However, given the state of matter in Aristotle is not very plausible. According to Aristotle, matter which is completely unknown and completely free of any structure. How can something that is completely passive and also free of real properties are the principle form of something as fundamental as the individual? This does not seem conceivable.
During the second start of metaphysics in the Latin West, philosophers have therefore sought other solutions to the thinking individual in the grip. For instance, Duns Scotus a concrete individual thing that is formed by hand a general nature and also a principle that he has designated with "this-ness' (haecceïtas). The 'this-ness' shows a general nature to be concrete individual existence. The 'this-ness' indicates the general nature of her final determination. For the conceptual thinking is 'this-ness' is not accessible. The 'this-ness' and thus the individual is guided in Duns Scotus nor grasp concepts. A concrete individual thing, according to Duns Scotus in his only confused express individuality. Following Duns Scotus, Ockham would be the specific individual being of any universal or general ontological category discard. According to him, is merely the individual. He therefore rejects the view that a general nature in the concrete by individual things exist. According to Ockham is universal only in our minds and not an ontological category in the concrete individual things themselves. This nominalist conception deprives the metaphysics of any possibility of the concrete individual thing from conceptual thinking to understand. The individual thus escapes from Ockham to our mind. For the traditional metaphysics as the individual remained a mystery. Individually there was an insurmountable hurdle to our understanding.
In his main work Sein und Zeit in 1927 also attempted Heidegger from the mind to grasp the specific in individual beings. To this end, he worked from an ontological difference between beings and the other of these entities. Heidegger did not want to dwell on the observable characteristics of beings. His program was precisely to the metaphysical being of beings from thinking to unlock. Instead of the given properties of the things suggested Heidegger meaningful way things are central. A. Toll puts it in his college lecture on the existential philosophy and especially the thought of Heidegger as follows: "These are [...] to the presence or existence of things to emphasize, however, not a presence that rigid, but their presence as a significant factor, So such things are present and how things show their presence. Toll also refers in his review that his Safranski Martin Heidegger and his time defines as follows: "Heidegger to the fundamental emotion of factical go forward from this phenomenological show. Heidegger thus focuses on the being of every existing being rather than something that only counts as a property of one or more entities. These are at the level of the concrete individual existence, according to Heidegger since Plato totally into oblivion. These are oblivion to be undone by his understanding from the man again gain access to the being of being. However, as noted in his review Tol is the later Heidegger holds that "the existential analysis of Being and Time remained too abstract." Toll also noted that this analysis Heidegger too much "A purely phenomenological description which was spoken about the existence, but not existence." Similar to the earlier traditional metaphysics Heidegger seems therefore failed to see the concrete being of individual things from the mind to uncover.
recalled having Lyotard seems to describe the sublime as it is completely indescribable and unthinkable 'happens' or 'is' to struggle with exactly the same problems as traditional metaphysics and Heidegger in Sein und Zeit . The failure of metaphysical thinking to the specific individual being minded in its grip for Lyotard appears to be a source of inspiration been. Lyotard approaches the mystery of the concrete individual existence is not from the metaphysical thinking, but from the aesthetic experience of the sublime. Thus, by Lyotard in art found a new way to reflect the ancient mystery of the existence of concrete individual things. Lyotard points in the fourth part of chapter 6 of L'Inhumain therefore the leader of the avant-garde art to demonstrate the non-standard rep indefinable aspects of the "happening" or the brutal fact of it of things. Modern art is not just this indefinable representable 'There is' to present.
(From 'On the sublime in Longinus' - GJE Rutten)
"
0 comments:
Post a Comment