What Do Morticians Do With Blood

Part

How To Wear A Men's Silk Scarf

Chomsky vs. Foucault

Rogue Status Reflecter

TRANSROMANTICISMO, CONSERVATISM AND SENSUAL ULTRA CHIC IN THE MEXICAN POETRY

by Jeremiah Marquine

No mystery, life is not worth living. No mystery, no poetry. Jorge Luis Borges wrote that "all poetry is mysterious, no one knows quite what has been given to write. The sad mythology of our time talking about the subconscious, or, what is even more beautiful, the subconscious, the Greeks invoked the muse, the Jews to the Holy Spirit, the meaning is the same. "The fate of human language is uncertain. Man is a creature wandering, their disobedience led to the time which is now subject. What it means to dare to hope of redemption, of freedom from time and abolish it? The same has been taken from ancient times, poetry, God's eyes.

From the death of Ramón López Velarde to date, have spent 87 years and not much literarily speaking. During this time the Mexicans have not changed much the way we feel and perceive the meaning. Our problem is still the feelings or sentimentality. In essence, being Mexican is romantic and sensual. And do not do much to verify this assertion, one only has to go to repertoire we grew up and where we have extracted more than a sensory experience and if you like corny. In the halls of our memory is always hears the echo of the romantic music of the trio of crooners who sing lyrics of spite, rancor loved, pure romance. Otherwise, how explain the success of the dramas that make surprise mourn and popular sensibilities?. How to explain the success of sensitive literature in Mexico? How to explain the success of Jaime Sabines, whose romantic and sensual poetry poetry popular than other poets, say, "better" than the Chiapas?.
Mexicans are
romantic even when we do not want to be romantic. Our problem and the problem of Mexican poetry are the feelings and way of expressing them. The Mexican study finds Lucy Reidl, director of the School of Psychology, UNAM, suffer more intense symptoms of disease in two romantic: jealousy and envy. The first caused by the presence of a rival that threatens the relationship, and envy the fact that compared to others and "perceive themselves as inferior, because others have a number of things we want and we can not have" . These emotions, determined by the sociocultural environment is the cause of 30% of passion killings in Mexico. But these emotions and their derivatives are the source of many songs and lots of literature. Poetry is all that we talk about ourselves.

Poetry, as the Romantics believed eighteenth and nineteenth century, remains, even today despite all the trappings of so much postmodern-assimilable, merciless rough, strident imagery and displacement-the hope of a return to primitive harmony. A kind of salvation to the horror ontological philosophers. A mystery in itself. The sentiments expressed in these works are those of the creators who expose their dissatisfaction with the world, their anxiety infinity, their pursuit of all, his passionate love, his craving for freedom, their moods, their personal mythologies.

What else is poetry hundred fifty years after? In short: aspiration into the vastness and escape to somewhere yet unknown; flight out of bounds ... This is what the novel by Karl Philip Moritz Anton Rieser character called "the sufferings of the imagination" to escape a hostile world, the poet decides to replace the reality of a personal universe, or in many cases, parallel, but necessarily full of mystery. Romanticism.

In essence, what is the poetry? If not a bunch of feelings (referred to here as poetic units constituting neutral value): impotence, neglect, loneliness, nostalgia, grief, fear, resentment, sleaze, death, misery, anguish, love, lost love, time, joy. Feelings that are, say, computer language, support the stem base of poetry, but to suit the formal scaling, ie variations (or if you want updates) that occur from age to age and reloaded or updated according to the historical-cultural values \u200b\u200band aesthetic perception of these units through new reconnections with other more significant lines active and current. What these lines can be more active significance? Different styles or current that is inserted in the literary work. This insertion leads to a positive or negative to neutral units but whose intrinsic value (ie, whether it is nostalgia, nostalgia will remain well be imagined, constructivist or barroquialista), is not affected at all by changes detail determined by the context or different circumstances. although these approaches make the illusion of a particular style say.

If we risk, then the above approach we are able to say that poetry-if we do this, as a universe whose components neutral value (feelings) unchanging and interchangeable, are basically the constituent unit of the poem, to create a new sub-transmutability remains: variability in connection, through which it seeks to create one or more other realities.

already know that the feelings in the literature itself does not create feelings of poetry. These sensations are created because of the skill, talent and intuitive tuning exists in the poet to connect different categories sensitive. Also depends on more or less vicissitudes of aesthetic experience and the realization of these in a different object. Lyric poetry is a specialty sensory experience and feelings are subject to constitute the aesthetic experience.

Why says that feelings in poetry is a unit of value neutral? Because in its primordial state are similar to a monody, a melody itself, which only reaches higher registers (amplification aesthetics) as associative complexity grows, its sensitive accompaniments, allowing new discourses and new realities.

The
transromanticismo
Mexican Modern poetry begins with Ramon Lopez Velarde. "In Ramon Lopez Velarde gain a sense all Mexican poetic endeavors, the originality is difficult to see by his indecision, "wrote Jorge Cuesta. Or perhaps because of his conservatism. Velarde

transforms the components of romance, reconnection subtle images opposition and adjust the way they perceive the existing symbols. Intentionally and systematically violates the institution poetic force and the same grammatical rule of his time, alters the poetic combination axes given by similarities and dissimilarities and associations of images created by contiguity or attempted misuse of the lines of significance. (Helena Beristain, analysis and interpretation of the lyric poem, pp.30. UNAM 1989.

However, despite all this lucid artifice His work still smelling of romanticism underlies the prodigious verbal structure mournful sentimentality, sadness and deep depression, the erotic sensuality and angst. Although baudelariano and everything, Velarde's work is pure romanticism. However, romance is a metamorphosed, off-kilter, unbalanced by means of which creates a higher form of romanticism, transromanticismo and a new way of perceiving the world: the neosensualismo. Categories that will influence the Mexican poetry of the next fifty years.

The romanticism transromanticismo exceeds their ability to hide the meaning and the inclusion of the convergence between the textual and vital, and their integration in a significantly broader horizon. Is a script that refers to itself in self-reflection, and becomes the protagonist of the text, which leads to a metapoetic absorption, which is the particular quality of twentieth century literature, in which "absorbs writing (...) the whole literary identity. " Roland Barthes. Xavier Rubert de Ventos, agrees with this statement, because it sees modern art as the effort to dominate the "recall" about the "significance", to the extent of revealing the nature of artifice or fiction. The

transromanticismo poetry is a category of convergence looking for the intersection of time and the relationship of the neutral values \u200b\u200bof Romanticism sensitive units in other categories. We can say that is a constant masking units aesthetic poetic romance neutral because only then is it possible to conectibilidad with more uncertainty and implementation of a literary work.

is a constant because it leads by itself or in combination with other literary records, the formation of new relationships of meaning artistically inert factor, for our time, the romance. We can say that is a variation in the constant emotional connection poetic neutral units.

When you mention here the category concept to refer to transromanticismo, the aim is to capture, with an emphasis on the concept of relationship, an arrow, rather than element and belonging, the intuibilidad a kind of poetic value units neutral, which are related by morphisms in the category. "It is in terms of sequence of probabilities that the structure of poetry can be described and interpreted with the utmost rigor." (Roman Jakobson. Closing Statements: Linguistics and Poetics).

transromanticismo When we say that we are saying is a category which is a structure which fits intuited the ability to make connections between domain and codomain relations poetically neutral units, as is usually done to create booster and sensitive from constant emotional romanticism, allowing new discourses and new realities. Conservatism



poetry does not begin nor never returns to the starting point: a new beginning and a continuing perpetual return. Transmutability remains. Mexican poetry has always been romantic, baroque and conservative, the latter perhaps his contribution to poetry movements outside the country, is negligible if not nonexistent. Mexican poetry is a poetry romantic, sensual, conservative and consumption.

Justo Sierra many years ago said a truth, so far always a virgin, as are the great truths. In the prologue to the poetry of Manuel Gutiérrez Nájera, wrote: "It is true, first, that all our literature since 1830 is romantic poetry romantic [...] and we've been a long time despite the transformations undergone schools our teachers overseas. We have not managed to write poetry never purely objective, in each of our lines we emptied all our feelings, our whole personality, we have not done more than subjective poetry. Later have been some heroic attempts, we could say given our temperament, to leave the house and impersonating cause emotion, to make, in short, a little realism indifferent verse. " From the time

Justo Sierra wrote this text, 1896, to date, little things have changed: Mexican poetry remains of them are fundamentally romantic (Sabines, Homero Aridjes, Huerta, Dolores Castro, Enriqueta Ochoa), continues to produce splendid specimens psychopathological poetry, as he called it Sierra. Are few examples of the so-called poetry of reason or speculation, and when they arise "lyricism sprinkled gold that butterfly wings black." Think endless José Death Gorostiza, or a god Canto ore Jorge Cuesta.

modern Mexican poetry, if we pay attention to Octavio Paz, begins from the Romantics. "The company was excessive, he says, because from the word itself, when it comes to romance, we are expressing an attitude toward life in which the self is very important and at the same time breaks with tradition, with the aesthetics of the past , artists of the baroque or classical artists of the Renaissance. " For Paz Mexican poetry, or at least that's what it says, "is a poetry of rupture tradition and explains:" We believe that we must break with tradition, start something absolutely again. This sequence of ruptures and revolutions begins and ends with the Romantics in our century, "refers to the twentieth century and himself.

is great wisdom of Octavio Paz and his assertion seems strong but not to agree. Mexican poetry has been more than a broken romantic tradition and conservative, so that to date in Mexico has not produced any movement leading to rupture and that has affected or influenced other poetry or other literature, or continental Europe. The best that we have is to administer the estate transromántica started with Ramon Lopez Velarde, which added some ingredients unlike almost all loans or adaptations of poetic more vibrant. And Jorge Cuesta said so years before noting that what has been called Mexican poetry "are not only good applications of foreign literature." Moreover, he says, "it is not surprising that no Mexican of Mexican literature is impossible to find the slightest originality." Of course, when making this statement must take into account the context but did it the opposite is true today?

Mexican poetry is romantic condition rather than by tradition. In our poetry are still present and very recurrence units neutral value poetic romance and continue to determine by itself or in conjunction with other categories of the meaning and emotional value of Mexican poetry. The constant emotional

our lyrical poetry, its key features are: conservative, mournful, melancholy, evocative, dark and sensual. In short, a poetry of the emotions, however, its occurrence, strives in vain to get rid of her but romantic, off center.

This will transpose the latent romance-essential portion of the being of Mexican-produced, during the first half of the twentieth century a variety of romance, say, more elaborate more opalescent and more clever, in short, more modern. Transromántico romanticism that lyric poetry is revealed as a deed of impersonation, the structural decentrality, hyperbolic, Inter and trans-textual but closed in on itself, and ultimately barroquialista rhetoric.

ultra chic Sensism

The ultrachic is intoxicating sensuality artifice to show, and creating unique, responding to a society in which cultural values \u200b\u200bare primordial pleasure and individual freedom. Poetically

institutionalized eclecticism as method and shows the face of a theatrical and aesthetic creation is pleased to play with the ephemeral, the shine without complex things ecstatic empty, the image itself invented and renewed taste.

ultrachic Sensualism corresponds to a society where the complexity and minimized, the artificial playing primitivism, the study should not seem far-fetched, so neat has given way to ragged pauperism. Not meant to be, but to seduce, to appear. Confirms the extreme importance of the image, and plays to the provocation, the excess and eccentricity to dislike, surprise or shock. Poetry sensuality

ultrachic develops its themes in a frivolous, nominalist minialista, reductionist, nadista away from any suffering. Celebrate pleasures, nothing in the ecstasy of erotic imagery and the sensitive appearance of objects. Uses as a background to the nature, ecology, landscapes of the absurd. Eclectic legitimate return to the world of Gothic, Renaissance and Baroque-Rococo.

Sensualism retro ultrachic is the reformulation of the sensationalist doctrine advanced by the empiricist philosophers eighteenth-century phenomenon, through which states that all ideas respond to any impression received by our senses. This speculation results in the literature, at the beginning of a trend that puts intuitionist in the center of the search for equivalences sensitive poetic things. The thing is not a "Thing" is only a phenomenon, an event that engage the senses, a pure appearance. I remember the poem

Celebration things Julio Trujillo (Mexico City 1969). Perfectly illustrates what we have just discussed:

Arranged on the table things are flying, / the table with things flying. / In a second splendid / fills the back of eager emblems / eye looking figures / and stop [...] Everything is so manifest eyes, / and everything else disappears.

opens with the sensual language of the evidence that only shows nominated impalpable that is imprinted in the memory forever. It is refined sensual enarbolación objects. Represents the "pleasures of metamorphosis in the spiral of whimsical personality, the games of the superdiferenciación Baroque individualistic and self artificialist spectacle offered to the gaze of the Other." (Gilles Lipovetsky, The Empire of Ephemeral)


Mexican lyric poetry of the last promotion is no stranger to this condition of the language of the evidence. By studying the writing of the poets of the past 15 years can be found without difficulty the characteristics of sensuality ultrachic described above. Literature is dominated nominalism abroad, eroticism exasperated, the nadismo, humor, the suffering of others, but prone to violence free. It is rhetorical poetry, beauty and brightness fictitious false or misleading. A real sign of the times we live in where the important thing is to shine, not shiny, and like a lot, rather than being.

clothing is a literature of fluid as the creations of Valentino, transrománticos making lace skies that glow in the heterogeneous linguistic patterns and designs that celebrate the annoyance of the overabundance of objects; overabundance of useless. Glamour pure poetic language intransitorio spent on media. Elegant frivolity that world language reminiscent of the rococo.

is impossible given the short length, addressing step by step checking each of the proposals set forth herein because they correspond to a longer piece of reflection amplitude and still in process. However, at the conclusion of these notes we can infer that transromántica Mexican poetry is in their ceaseless weaving and explores how poetic styles. Remember what I said Cuesta, the "Mexican poetry (which is romantic origin) was not only good applications of foreign literature."


Mexican poetry is transromántica stream from outside the stridency of Maples Arce, futuristic concepts, Nouveau Baroque colloquial minialista, sensualist ultrachic, anyway. In each of these styles our poets have emptied all his feelings, his whole personality, all that sensuality, all that bipolarity that characterized the Mexican. In Mexico there has been more than transrománticismo with warmth and color gradations.

Businessforsale In Ski Station

THE ADVANTAGES OF SUSPECTED

by Gianni Vattimo

what Nietzsche called "school of suspicion" is perhaps what more generally characterized the thought of this century, to such an extent that could be considered his main "discovery" or inheritance the next century. It is as if we had realized that, as Nietzsche writes in More beyond good and evil, behind every cave lies a cave and so on. Understood in this way, the school of suspicion does not identify with the mere criticism of the ideology of Marxist label, or the Freudian psychoanalysis, that illuminate the unconscious also means to seize him and disband his power to condition.

fit Marxism and Freudian psychoanalysis, indeed, within the definition but without the radicalization that Nietzsche suggests, they would still only new theories of truth and reality. A very limited suspect, therefore, not be set aside, in this version, the suspicion that characterized Search-Platonic, but also the pre-Socratic-of "essences" of things. The suspicion of this century intellectuals recognizable in many positions in the last decades, also suspected of truth "true." Heidegger taught us to call this process the end of metaphysics. Indeed, if all you should ask why, the very notion of being radically transformed. There is nothing to which the thought can be still as compared to final data, a foundation, an undisputed authority. Since that failure to find a solid foundation is also unbearable, you can not avoid the question of the good reasons you have, if it does, the school of suspicion.

Should not we suspected in the suspect (too) general? It is the thesis of those (churches, ideologies reassuring, authorities several) lament the nihilistic tendency of twentieth-century culture. And yet, it is hard to oppose this trend indication nihilist who holds something to resist. Put another way: Is not the common experience of the absolute decline in our time? The believers will object that is not true that "God is dead" as Nietzsche claimed announce. Yet Christian theology could not attend the Holocaust and the many other horrors of the century without having to review their own ideas about God. Although it is difficult to bear because it seems to leave us no solid ground under their feet, nihilism has its "advantages." The dissolution of metaphysical absolutes also implies the end of the indisputable authorities. If not the triumph of reason, which never reaches final certainties, attended at least the triumph of the reasons, or exposure, from time to time, the reasons and arguments that suggest that a wider choice others.

Thus, the nihilism of the twentieth century also fall alejadísimas theories that seem to him, such as "communicative action" proposed by Habermas, that but rationality is not the "present" of a thesis, of a value to others in terms capable of being discussed "reasonably" and eventually accepted, and the many theories of argumentation that developed on the basis of reflection on logic and language. Ultimate foundations are no longer indisputable, but we must take into account the expectations, interests, the consensus of our fellows.

could say, perhaps, that being and reality no longer interested in the objectivity of things but rather the love and care for people. Of all the legacies left by the twentieth century, often dense and negative, perhaps nihilism just the most productive and full of future.

(c) Gianni Vattimo to Clarín, 1999. Translated by Cristina Sardoy

Iomega Egowindows 7 Portable Compatibility

AGING SCHOOL OF ONTOLOGY

by Maurizio Ferraris

Translation of Luis de Santiago, in Vattimo, G., Rovatti, PA (eds.) Weak thought, Cátedra, Madrid, 2000, pp. 169-191.

has been Paul Ricoeur, in his essay on Freud, de l'interprétation [i], who enforced the common name of "school of suspicion" to the triad Nietzsche-Freud-Marx. At this point, Ricoeur summarizes a fairly widespread position in contemporary culture, stating that the nexus that unites thinkers to initially less distant as far as concerns method and intent, as Nietzsche, Freud and Marx, would be a shared activity, "exposure" in a program and radical attempt to expose these deceptions in the history of philosophy . For the "school of suspicion", think equivalent to interpret. But the interpretation follows a "dizzying": not only traditions, received ideas, ideology, are misleading and mystifying, but the very notion of "truth" is the effect of stratification (and mystifying) historical, whose origins are rhetorical, emotional, concerned. The meaning "own" the true meaning of appearances and the secondary formations are the metaphor, is itself derived from something dark, something which, in turn, should also be subject to interpretation.
As Nietzsche writes in a page from the Book of the philosopher, "truths are illusions that have forgotten their true nature, metaphors that have lost significantly; currencies in which the coin has disappeared and that, consequently, are no longer considered as currency, but as metal "[ii].

Partly due to the influence of external circumstances pertaining to the history of culture in the broadest sense "school of suspicion" has been found, especially in the last twenty years, a very favorable reception; just think, for example, phenomena such as Nietzsche-Renaissance in France and in Italy, the widespread distribution of psychoanalysis.

But secondly, and probably not only by the disappearance of the circumstances "cultural" that led to its success, the "school of suspicion" pretty obvious signs manifested today expiration. Much more apparent as aging, however, Hermeneutics "in general"-and, particularly, the thought of Gadamer, today tends to impose itself as the horizon of philosophy itself "traditional" no methodical reflection about the philosophical and linguistic tradition.

Initially, one might even venture the hypothesis that hermeneutics has won its unifying role, its role as linguistic and theoretical koinè precisely bracketing more clearly exposes the intentions of the "school of suspicion" and appearing, not as a break and overcome the philosophical tradition, but as his memory and storage.

No doubt the reasons are obvious "cultural history" that have ruled the aging of the "school of suspicion" and the assertion of the hermeneutics of Gadamer court, but the fact remains that, within theoretical propiamene, left standing, at least three questions, which in part will try to answer in the pages that follow: a) what are the intrinsic limits of the hermeneutics of suspicion?, b) what is your relationship to Gadamer's hermeneutics?; c), to what extent some contamination of hermeneutics and the "school of suspicion" as the Grammatology by Jacques Derrida, retain some philosophic actuality in the panorama of contemporary theoretical reflection?

1. Unmasking LIMITS Two

analysis, Foucault and Derrida, can help to define more precisely some of the internal borders of the hermeneutics of suspicion.

First, Foucault, writing in 1964, recognizes two
risks to the mode of action of Nietzsche, Freud and Marx: nihilism and dogmatism. First, the nihilism [iii]. Foucault writes that the intensification of interpretation "unmasking" is constant over a mask to another, as they hide behind a mask other, and the metaphors continue to infinity without ever reaching a terminus ad quem, and wondered, about why that intensification can lead to the conclusion that, in reality, there is nothing to be fully understood and that the hermeneutic process runs itself.

Indeed, this result not only characterizes nihilistic hermeneutics of suspicion, but hermeneutics in general, think, say, in certain traits typically nihilistic reflection Gadamer, for whom the notion of "strong" really diluted in a dialogue diffuse in a collective exchange of meanings that are not supported by any stable referent, and not lead to the attainment of ultimate truths. However, if the hermeneutics of suspicion is, according to Foucault, different because, in her nihilistic resolution concerning the interpretation possesses shades typically aporetic until
provide a point of pathological character-a hermeneutics that contrary to what happens, for example, Gadamer, is overall "giddy." It ends this way, Foucault writes, in "a hermeneutics back on itself, which enters the territory of the languages \u200b\u200bthat autoimplican constantly, in the mythical region of pure madness and language" [iv].

Meanwhile, dogmatism is the reverse of nihilistic self-implication interpretations, in a sense, is merely the result of a reaction, which remains within the same field from what he faces. On the Genealogy of Morals, describing the genesis of the ascetic ideal, Nietzsche writes: "Better is a sense either that the absence of any meaning." Tired of so many masks, the player can stop at any of them or rely on a preconceived hermeneutical key, under which each signifier corresponds a stable meaning. Thus establishing a code, and hermeneutics becomes a semiotic.

Foucault also wrote: "A hermeneutic, in fact, become semiotic believe in the absolute existence of signs: abandons violence, unfinished, the infinity of interpretations, and makes the sign reign terror and beware of language that "[v].

Once again we face the ambiguity inscribed in all
hermeneutics of suspicion, always in danger of an excess or defect of interpretation; duplication that accompanies all unmasking appeal to rationality, and can also result in terms of a dialectic of Enlightenment, like the one drawn Adorno and Horkheimer: "Nietzsche understood, as very few after Hegel, the dialectic of Enlightenment, and has articulated the contradictory relationship that joins the domain. It should "spread the Enlightenment among the people, so that the priests acquire, all of them, bad conscience, and the same should be done in relation to the state. The role of the Enlightenment is to transform the whole behavior of the princes and rulers in a deliberate lie. " On the other hand, the Enlightenment has always been a tool of the "great artists in the work of government" [vi].

nihilism and dogmatism are mutually reinforcing, the exposure tends or turning in on oneself, or to lay the foundations of a new dogmatic myth eventually characterized by a "mythical horror to the myth" [vii].

Foucault analyzes try, therefore, indicate the present limits on the results, inevitable or not a hermeneutics of suspicion. Derrida, for his part, especially in consideration of the 'white mythology', which form the core of "Western metaphysics" - he says insistently dysfunction constitutes a contradiction originates, which characterize the project unmasked as such.

Nietzsche's passage reproduced in the preceding paragraph, and Derrida says in his essay on "Mythologie blanche" [viii] - appears at first glance as an attempt to "overcome metaphysics." Through a particular hermeneutic extreme, Nietzsche seems to reveal the hidden clauses in the metaphysical concept of "truth", which then manifests itself as a simple metaphor.

But Derrida contends, are we sure that this will entail exposure is not so intimate and constitutive, with the history of metaphysics? Apparently, Nietzsche reveals, according to the Enlightenment, a typical "white mythology," the belief in a stable foundation of truth, in order to be true, beyond the pollutions of the doxa and interest . In fact, however, this exposure is shown closely related with the very thing you want to correct, that is, is presented as "typically" metaphysical.

Indeed, Derrida continues, what is the Sino-metaphysical ambition to uncover the metaphors, to overcome the veil of appearance? Rather than the metaphor of the coin, brought it up by Nietzsche, should consider the comparison of light-conceived and comprehensive picture of all hermeneutics of suspicion and all metaphysics, which perfectly illustrates how the desire to expose more than shelter contamination of metaphysics, is in fact the very essence of what, in the tradition of Nietzsche and Heidegger, it is understood with this name.

"foundational metaphor," writes Derrida, "not only as metaphor photoblog-and in this regard, the history of our philosophy is a Fotología, understood as the history or light-treated, but already As metaphor, the metaphor in general, passage of an entity to another, or meaning to another, authorized by the initial submission and a shift from analog to be under the body, is the initial gravitational traps and suppresses the flow inevitably metaphysics. Destination that only a certain naivete can be considered as reprehensible, but provisional, crash of a "history" as a slip, a mistake of thinking in history (in history). It is, in Historiam,
drop in the philosophy of thought, by which history has begun its course [ix].

The desire to unmask, to project a light bulb beyond the veil of appearances
, to achieve the proper sense hidden behind the metaphor is not the final act of metaphysics, the "noon of the free spirit 'of Nietzsche spoken on the contrary, is just the initial act of all metaphysics. On the other hand, metaphysics is not just for ignoring the "truth" itself is just an old metaphor, it is, rather, because, conscious metaphorical character of its own statements, has attempted throughout its history to reduce the metaphorical meaning of its own, appropriate, conceptually unambiguous.

If considered from this perspective, it is no longer tied to a dialectic of Enlightenment
but rather the interpretation of Heidegger's "history of metaphysics as the history of forgetfulness of being-the hermeneutics of suspicion is presented as the culmination of this adventure. The subject that "reveals" that recognizes a more or less nihilistic multiple funds hidden behind the metaphor, or after the Freudian consciousness or false consciousness which is the subject of criticism of ideologies is precisely the metaphysical subject par excellence, which embodies the will to power itself in the "will to interpret."

2. TABLE OF Hermeneutics. RECONSTRUCTION AND INTEGRATION


Thus the conclusion, not too paradoxical, considering the hermeneutics of suspicion as a typical example of thinking 'strong', assertive, metaphysical ... to a degree comparable to the naive belief, positive or ideological aims unmask. And that, not only because of the possible consequences that might lead "the nihilism of the interpretation or dogmatism, crystallization in a semiotics or a structure, "but mainly because the task that the unmasking strongly encouraged.

These considerations are clarified to try to classify this type of
hermencútica infield typology proposed by Gadamer in Truth and Method [x].

Referring specifically to the aesthetics and interpretation of works of art inherited from tradition, Gadamer discussed, before presenting his own model
interpretive hermeneutical two modes considered insufficient: the reconstruction, which defends Schleiermacher, and integration, given by the Hegelian philosophy of history [xi]. Relate hermeneutics with the works of the past, writes Gadamer, does not mean or reconstruct the original historical world in which they saw the light, according to Schleiermacher claims, or simply according to the Hegelian model, inscribe these works in the movement of a historical teleology, which would link, through mediation by the thought, with the present moment.

In Gadamer's perspective, integration, as hermeneutic practice, requires a different mediation, no mediation by the absolute spirit, but that language essentially a tradition carried out with the work that this tradition bequeathed us.

hermeneutics relationship consists, therefore, a tradition, transmission and translation that integrates the work inevitably lost over time and what it earns, ie the historical and spiritual world in which born, hopelessly lost, and history-largely accidental, that is, without guidance, no urgent non-teleological and their performances, their "fortune"; history, therefore, becomes part of the same work the object to be interpreted as such.

Wirkungsgeschichte concept [xii], to "history of effects", assumes that the work is constitutively spurious, inauthentic, or, which is, that the interpretation is always carried out in an area already committed, and that, therefore, strictly speaking, the "unmasking" is not possible. If, from this perspective, consider again the example of Nietzsche, that of truth as an old metaphor, we find that the sense-the reduction of metaphor, the unveiling of the "proper", allegedly hidden by the metaphorical trope constitutively is unattainable, and that the interpretation
would rather establish a connection, more diffuse and less exposed peremptorily, with the historical succession of interpretations, of metaphors, of translations of meaning.

More specifically, we try to frame the hermeneutics of suspicion within the typology
Gadamer, we notice that the will to overcome the veil (historical, ideological, positive) appearance, or the attempt to transcend metaphysics tout court is revealed visibly akin to Schleiermacher reconstructive project, namely, the outline of a hermeneutics that covers internal and external joints of the work to restore, along with its structure, also the historical world in which he saw the light, the origin.

Indeed, in the school of suspicion, especially as regards
Freud and Nietzsche, there are plenty of safeguards "anti-metaphysical", among which should be listed a greater interest in the effects, given the circumstances that have given rise to some theoretical or moral concept, but this does not negate the fact that the fundamental hermeneutical intention is that of putting into practice a reconstructive analysis.

As shown exemplarily the historical vicissitudes of Freudian metapsychology and the same
Freudian hermeneutics of suspicion
actually tends to establish a direct and proper 'metaphysics' with nature, with the immediate, drives border with origins etahistóricos biological behaviors.

can therefore be applied to the "school of suspicion" as Gadamer writes about hermeneutics "reconstructive" of Schleiermacher: "In short, such a definition of hermeneutics is no less contradictory than any restitution or restoration of a past life. If we look at the historical nature of our being, the reconstruction of the original conditions as any other type of restoration, appears as a doomed enterprise. Life repaired, recovered from their state of alienation, and life is not original, it simply becomes, retaining its status alienated, a second life in the field of culture [...]. Thus, an operation to conceive
hermeneutics to understand how the restoration of origin would, just, pure communication of an obsolete meaning "[xiii].

reconstructive attempts to encourage the hermeneutics of suspicion are not less than inspired, though for different purposes, the hermeneutics of Schleiermacher.

towards them, of course, the project of integration by
Gadamer shows, more clearly, such a procedure "weak", certainly less assertive and metaphysical. As

integration advocated by Hegel, Gadamer's hermeneutics is based on the awareness of the impossibility of any restoration of any definitive interpretation or total transparency. But by replacing the Hegelian philosophy of history (teleological fundamental reasons) by the concept of Wirkungsgeschichte, Gadamer further weakens the will "unmask" deposited in the hermeneutic act. The interpretation does not fall and in the context of an attempt to return, complete restoration of origin even more, or even better, to motivate the succession of interpretations and transformations, the "downbeat" of history, but that considering the inheritance-ultimately accidental - a series of different interpretations, which change while the object of our awareness of interpretation and interpreters (as well as our way of "closer" to the object).

Rather than being presented as the achievement of a final transparency of evidence that does not support views, hermeneutics shows now submerged in a constitutive opacity. First of all, writes Gadamer, the Wirkungsgeschichte "early to pronounce on what is presented to us as problematic as the search object, and we forget half of what it is, indeed, forget the whole truth historical phenomenon, if we take that phenomenon, in its immediacy, as the truth "[xiv]. In short, the hermeneutics of suspicion is affected, as reconstructive hermeneutics of Schleiermacher, the historicist illusion which is not brought into question the historical picture that determines the subject of interpretation, on the contrary, hermeneutics Gadamer arises precisely from the consciousness of the historical factors that define us as interpreters. 'Integration' hermeneutics is thus, above all, a temporary procedure, changeable, unstable "historical meaning can not be ever fully become autotransparente "[xv].

At this point one might wonder if all the requirements "debilitating" in relation to the peremptory nature of hermeneutics of suspicion are met by the draft Gadamer.

3. INTEGRATION OF THE DE-CONSTRUCTION

As much as does face an opacity that eliminates most urgent intentions of the hermeneutics of suspicion, Gadamer's interpretative model with at least one trait that sets out immediately to criticism. This is the clear predominance of continuity - between present and past, in particular, but also between moments of a tradition- that characterizes it. A continuing trend toward acting in two directions: first, the unproblematic nature of the interpreter access to the legacy of a tradition (texts, documents, monuments), the second, the excessive ease with which Gadamer seeks to establish a productive dialogue between the texts of that tradition and the current conditions of social dialogue.

The two trends are obviously related. Using terminology
Heidegger, Gadamer arguably "makes present"
too clearly the tradition that avoids, in a way too fast, the caesuras and the differences observed in it [xvi]. The observations in Truth and Method on the interpretation of written texts are, in this respect, quite significant. Indeed, Gadamer writes: "In the form of writing, everything that is transmitted any time becomes contemporary present. It gives a peculiar coexistence depaso and present, as this awareness is the possibility of free access to any written tradition, without resorting to oral transmission, it mixes news past and present, on the contrary, addressing directly to the literary tradition, which includes awareness takes a genuine possibility of widening one's horizons, enriching thus the world itself with a new dimension "[xvii].

The past, as it passed us by writing-that is, as pure idealism, without contamination and spurious mediations with this, which are always given on the talk-the paradoxical simultaneity conquest to the present. A contemporary who contradistingue also by strong transparency, an "evidence" of writing itself peculiar in short, by a desire to communicate, which Gadamer accepts as if not closed virtually no problems: "In all that we have come in the form of writing lies a will of persistence, forged by the peculiar form of permanence that we call literature. It not only gives us a set of monuments and signs. On the contrary, all belonging to the literature has a specific contemporary with any present. Understanding does not mean literature primarily traced back to a past existence, but to participate in this, a content of the above "[xviii].

reconstructive Will the interpretation would restore the past as past, the origin in its entirety, the objective truth of the intentions of the author of a text. For his part, Gadamer considerations, although directed against this attempt, they tend to define writing as a vehicle of tradition, in terms of a abstract ideality of language. In this regard, Gadamer writes: "As written, the language reaches its true spirituality, and that, in the written tradition includes the awareness that rises to a position of full sovereignty. No longer depend on anything strange. Thus, the awareness that reads
is potentially in possession of history "[xix].

No longer repetition of the past, understanding becomes participation in this sense. Guaranteed by the spirituality of writing, a fundamental continuity-league moments scattered and remote, and after, perhaps not fully understood, making them present in the interpretation. The Gadamer integration raises the question whether the first task of hermeneutics would not so much in building a bridge between us as performers and tradition that allegedly belong, but rather to ask whether this assumption is legitimate, and, therefore, if our belonging to the tradition is so linear that enables access "simultaneous" to the texts, as advocated by Gadamer.

In short, it appears that while the hermeneutics of suspicion tends to put emphasis on the aspects "dizzying" and aporetic of interpretation, Gadamer integration is presented as a position too peaceful as a very little problem with the legacies of tradition, understood as hermeneutical objects. (On the other hand, this impression is confirmed by examining the problem of integration in the opposite direction, ie, considering the way Gadamer, for example, in the controversy with Habermas [xx] - seeks to isolate two types of heterogeneous dialogue: the interpreter with the tradition, which takes place between members of society. Again, the tradition is reduced to the presence at this dialog, or, conversely, the latter is entered without difficulty into the groove tradition.)

Given this done this, you can better understand why Derrida has decided to launch the hypothesis of a Grammatology: the hermeneutics of tradition is no longer considered as a coherent set of texts we virtually simultaneous and transparent to the reading, but as caesuras analysis of the discontinuities, lack of essential transparency of a traditio which has ceased to belong or who has never been ours.

From this perspective, the objects of interpretation, above all, the texts, not offered at their "true spirituality", but rather in a state of opaque material, such as 'monuments' or 'signs', or as fingerprints that can never be present, if we adopt the terminology of Derrida. And the task of interpretation does not intend to reconstruct the past, as in the school of suspicion, or integrate it into the present, along the lines of Gadamer, but on the contrary, attempts to deconstruct a tradition made up of prints and texts never be fully intelligible.

In fact, the fundamental goal of deconstruction is, itself, to think the difference, the gap between our understanding of the objects to which it applies. Hermeneutics activity becomes, at this point, in an unanswered question, is valuable primarily as an ontological exercise, as inconmensurablidad indication of understanding the subject matter of understanding. "The question Derrida writes in an essay on Levinas, must be preserved. But as polling. Freedom of the question (double genitive) must be affirmed and defended. Stay grounded, tradition for the question that continues to be questioning "[xxi].

Here, the tradition continues only as hermeneutic object, such as thematic unity of interpretation, but does not offer, as in Gadamer, a positive approach
understanding, legitimacy "historical" (all weak and not transparent take your pick) of the act of interpretation. In relation to the hermeneutic re-constructive or integrative, the deconstruction advocated by Derrida is presented as the extreme dilution of the purpose of truly understanding, to penetrate to the core, if not of things, at least of language and tradition, deposit repertoire of philosophical keywords.

Grammatology The objective is not to indicate the sense of tradition or the legitimacy of an interpretation, but untie, dissolve or transform into discontinuous, with the introduction of corners or margins of play instituted models (and positively exercised) of interpretation. This function critique of the deconstruction is clearly seen, in a different field, that of the controversy with analytic philosophy in Derrida's reply to John Searle, who accused him of having misunderstood the theory of speech acts: "A theoretical the linguistic act, "writes Derrida, claiming the legitimacy of the build-own-provided with a minimum dose of consistency with his own theory, there should be some time enpleado discuss problems like the following: the fundamental purpose," is to be true? In real appear? In affirming the truth? "[xxii].

But at this point is Derrida clearly has changed his perspective, not only regarding the concept
widespread philosophy in the tradition of linguistic analysis, but also in comparison with the purposes and modes of practice the interpretation of both the 'school of suspicion "as hermeneutics of Gadamer.

4. Philosophy as a kind of writing

What is this change of perspective? First of all, regarding the internal affairs of Grammatology, this mutation involves a new way to interact with written texts and the problem of writing in general. In the debate with Searle reads something explicitly, implicitly, can be detected in all the work of Derrida: Of Grammatology radically put in brackets the problem of "reference" to the reality and the ability to replace, with a ceremony indicative function "foundations" of writing and interpreting texts. Grammatology is a type of writing, and not simply
stylistic skills it takes, but, above all, because the "reference" is only the written tradition (philosophical, metaphysical), which constitutes us as interpreters. The Derrida is, therefore, use an emphatic and somewhat transformed the classic hermeneutical principle of sola scriptura, but precisely as it is a matter of emphasis, in fact highlights a trend already implicitly contained in hermeneutics as such.

Grammatology's thesis as "kind of writing 'occupies a central place in an essay by Richard Rorty, recently included in a larger writing [xxiii]. In the words of Rorty, when taken as a reference only the corpus of the philosophical tradition, Derrida would become the last follower of a "line" of modern thought that has its origins in Hegel, and is opposed to a Lignea parallel, Kantian origin, the latter argues that thinking is contrary to the assertions of Derrida, relating, the best way possible, with objects and real world structures and natural. This second tradition also holds that writing is merely a "supplement" (adopting terminology that Derrida
making Rousseau), and that language itself tends, asymptotically, the very self-suppression, for the pure display or ostentation, maximum understood as correspondence between mind and nature. And, as Derrida would Lignea follower of Hegel, the exponents of the "line" Kant are represented in the words of Rorty, by the Anglo-Saxon language analysts [xxiv].
however, continues Rorty, relationship between 'Hegelian' and 'Kantian' exclusion is not simple or mutual misunderstanding, and indeed, it might seem, but rather may be equivalent to the distinction that the epistemological debate between the "critical science" and the normal science or the difference between 'abuse' and normality tout court. Thus, parasitism Grammatology-which Rorty makes in relation to linguistic analysis but the conclusions of the preceding paragraph can also be applied to Gadamer's hermeneutics, not shown as a simple "transfer" as a path interrupted, but as a kind of land experimental, along
critical and inventive. Rorty writes: "The dispute between Kantians and non-Kantian [...] presents a contrast between those who want to accept (and see) things as they are, [...] and who, by contrast, wanted to transform the current vocabulary "[xxv].

In light of these considerations, we revisit the problem of relations between the Grammatology, on the one hand, Gadamer's hermeneutics and the "school of suspicion" on the other. In short, the peculiarities of Derrida's work can be summarized in three points: 1) The most immediate effect of Grammatology, as we have seen, critical of the "continuous" Gadamer. In a sense, Derrida wields against the hermeneutics of 'integration' weapons that resemble the requirements "debunkers" of the school of suspicion. And indeed, a critical dimension can only give meaning to a set of analysis, such as the Grammatology, which, by virtue of its structure "arquitéctonica" and under "system" organization theory that seems to be no must have had significance. In itself, talking about science Grammatology as written traces of meaningless signifiers and the like, or outline a theory of différence, ie waste or waste and non-explicit aspects of a tradition, it makes little sense, Derrida himself is, moreover, conscious, as evidenced by their insistence on the ineffability of la difference. Much more sensible,
regarding the "continuity" of Gadamer's hermeneutics, is, however, the effect of "constructive, critical, Grammatology, applied to a tradition that we are inclined to" read "as homogeneous and translatable.

2) However, to highlight this critical issue is not equivalent to the simple recovery of debunkers intentions school of suspicion. The unmasking has been rather replaced by the invention of terminology, that is, first, by a work on the signifier and signified not. It therefore excluded the possibility of achieving, through the deconstruction of a tradition or of certain concepts pertaining to it, a real and fundamental sense, meaning "own" basic. Transform philosophy into a kind of writing means essentially, through stylistic procedures, terminology, or by a distortion or an abuse of certain semantic fields, "making possible" the philosophical tradition, opening the way for new possibilities hermeneutics. The problem of school suspicion is translated by Derrida in terms of a debate between "science criticism" and "normal science." For example, in one of the writings included in L'écriture et la différence, reads: "Nietzsche, Freud, Heidegger [...] have acted within concepts inherited from metaphysics. However, since these concepts are not actually pure elements or atoms, but are made in a syntax and a system, the acceptance of any of them fully reintroduce metaphysics. This is what allows these destroyers to destroy each other, for example, makes it possible to consider Heidegger Nietzsche-with a lucidity and rigor comparable to bad faith and misunderstanding, as the last metaphysician, as the last "platonic." The operation could be repeated with regard to Heidegger's own, Freud or anyone else. There is most common operation nowadays it "[xxvi].

The simple succession of unmasking is derived from the naive adoption of the language received. By contrast, the "philosophy conceived as a kind of writing" and, therefore, an invention, means in the context of Derrida's introduction of a double bind relationship with the philosophical tradition on the one hand, you give up hope overcome, a radical unmasking the 'metaphysics', and secondly, the game and terminological changes introduced in that same tradition can eliminate the peremptory nature of the metaphysical (character, by contrast, tends to play by the estate of the unmasking).

3) A third consequence of the "parasite" of Grammatology. The double bind relationship established between Derrida and deconstruction of tradition is, in short, the anthropologist's own [xxvii]. That is, the link comes from a double consciousness: first, that of radical discontinuity that separates us from a tradition we do not necessarily belong, and second, the conviction that it is inevitable that we use a language and that this condition us (as it is unavoidable the "ethnocentrism"). Considered from the point of view "ethnological" the problem of interpretation would, in this case, to give a positive status and recognizable to the problem of discontinuity in relation to our philosophical tradition, and this, without giving emphasis intermission that truly " metaphysical "proper" school of suspicion, and, moreover, not take for granted a basic consistency between our present and past of philosophy, as Gadamer succeeds.

[i] Cf De l'interpretation. Essai sur Freud, Paris, Seuil, 1965, trad. E. Italy Renzi: Della interpretazione. Saggio its Freud, Milan, 11 Saggiatore, 1966; see
particularly, pp. 46 et seq. of trad. Italian (L'interpretazione come Esercizio of sospetto).

[ii] Not yet available in the Opere edited by Colli and Montanari, Il philosopher book is translated in a separate volume: Rome, Savelli, 1978. The event included here, slightly modified by us can be found on pg. 76.

[iii] "Nietzsche, Freud, Marx ', in Cahiers de Royaumont, 6, Paris, Minuit, 1967 (Proceedings of Royaumont international conference on Nietzsche), pages 182-192.

[iv] Nietzsche, Freud, Marx, cit., P.. 192.

[v] Ibid.

[vi] M. Horkheimer, T. W. Adorno, Dialektik des Aufklärung, Amsterdam, Querido
Verlag, 1947, trans. Italian L. Vinci: Diarletica dell'illuminismo, Turin, Einaudi, 1974, pg. 53; the Stressing is ours.

[vii] Op cit., P.. 37.

[viii] "La Mythologie blanche," in Poétique, 5 (1971), now J. Derrida, Margins of Philosophy, Madrid, Cátedra, 1988. See, especially, the last section of the essay, The métaphysique Relief métaphore, pp. 308 ff.

[ix] "Force et signification", in Critique, 193-194 (Junio-Julio 1963), L'écriture Ahora in
et la difference, Paris, Seuil, 1967, trad. Italian G. Pozzi: The scrittura e la differenza, Einaudi, Torino, 1971, pg. 34.

[x] HG Gadamer, Wahrheit und Method, Tubingen, Mohr, 19723, trans. Italian G. V
attimo: Veritas and method, Milan, Bompiani, 19833.

[xi] Cf., In particular pp. 202-207 Ricostruzione-competes and eats integrazione
ermeneutici-of trad. Italian and true method.

[xii] Cf., Especially "II della principle" Wirkungsgeschichte "" in Truth and Method, trans. Italian cit., pp. 350-363.

[xiii] Op cit., P.. 205.

[xiv] Op cit., P.. 351.

[xv] Op cit., P.. 352.

[xvi] On the predominance of continuity in Gadamer's interpretation of the artwork as well as in Gadamer's hermeneutics in general, see G. Vattimo, "Estetica ed hermeneutics", in Rivista di Estetica, ns, 1 (1979), pp. 3-15.

[xvii] Truth and Method, trans. Italian cit., p.. 448.

[xviii] Op cit., P.. 450, emphasis added.

[xix] Op cit., P.. 449.

[xx] See, for example, replicas of Gadamer to Habermas' Rhetorik, Hermeneutik und Ideologiekritik "in Kleine Schrifien, vol. l, Tübingen, Mohr, trad. Various Authors Part Italian, Turin, 1973, pp. 55 et seq.

[xxi] J. Derrida, "Violence et métaphysique. Essai sur la pensée d'Emmanuel Levinas ", in Revue de métaphysique et de Morale, 3 and 4 (1964) L'écriture now et la différence, trans. Italian cit., p.. 100.

[xxii] "Limited Inc. abc," in Glyph, 2 (1977), pp. 162-254, 178.

[xxiii] R. Rorty, Philosophy as a Kind of Writing. An Estay on Derrida, in ID, Consequences of Pragmatism (Essays: 1972 - 1980), Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 1982.

[xxiv] For example, Searle mean that the debate between Derrida and Austin can
regarded as a confrontation between two traditions, and argues that it is a simple misunderstanding of the theory of speech acts by Derrida (see J. Searle, "Reiterating the Differences (reply to Derrida)," in Glyph, 1, 1977, pp. 198-208).

[xxv] Consequences of Pragmatism, cit., P.. 107.

[xxvi] The structure, he signe et le jeu dans le discours des sciences humaines (1966), L'écriture now et la différence, trans. Italian cit., p.. 363.

[xxvii] The same draft Grammatology emerges from the discussion of "ethnocentrism" of Levi-Strauss in reference to the problem of literate societies. See J. Derrida, Of Grammatology, Paris, Minuit, 1967, pp. 149 ff.

Treatment Of Verruca Plana (flat Warts)

by Martin Heidegger

First, an observation on the first indicator of facticity. The title that we started putting: ontology.

"ontology" means doctrine of being. If you listen to this term is not out anything other than a vague indication that what is to be investigated in what follows and that what is going to talk (through some form of topic) is being, then the word ontology, as a title, it has provided all services offered . But if the term ontology means a discipline that, for instance, could be within the range of tasks from the neo-scholastic or the Scholastic phenomenological or currents of academic philosophy determined or influenced by Phenomenology, then the word ontology is inadequate as a title for the item is and how to address the issue.

But if you also take the ontology as a slogan, for example, Kant attacks today have become fashionable, or more plainly contrary to the spirit of Luther, or even more fundamental: against all open asking not panic in advance to their own consequences, in short, if the ontology is defined as a claim for the slave revolt against philosophy as such, then the term ontology as a title can not only lead to confusion and errors.

In what follows, the ontology and ontological terms are used only in the sense of emptiness that we have referred, as a non-binding. Mean: a question and a determination made straight as it is, what to be, and how, is still entirely unknown.

While memory or evocation of the Greek word on (on), ontology means both the treatment of {2} questions received, traditional, referring to being that on the ground or basis of classical Greek philosophy continued after starring a great strength followers. And although the ontology transmitted, received, traditional, present itself as dealing with the determinations or general nature of being, it really is and also the view is a certain level of being.

The use of the term is done in the modern world ontology means both as a theory of object and, suddenly, only a formal theory, and in this respect agrees with the old ontology (and metaphysics, with the old Metaphysics generalis).

But the modern ontology is not an isolated discipline, but who is or is presented in a peculiar entanglement with strictly what is meant by phenomenology. Ontology as a concept articulated and projected in terms of what we mean by research only started emerging (newly emerged) in the Phenomenology. Ontology of nature, culture, ontology, ontologies materials: these are the disciplines ontologies in which the "objective content" (or "content knowledge" or "cognitive content") of these regions (or that these regions account or that these regions contain) peel or debug it and it brings to light in objectualist character required. And thus obtained it later and later served as a common thread to the problems of the constitution, that is, for clarifying the structure and genesis contexts of consciousness, the objects of this or that species.

Conversely, only from the Phenomenology is possible to raise the ontology corresponding to a secure base in relation to the problems that concern the ontology, and maintain it in a regular and orderly way. It is looking at consciousness-in (and only looking at the consciousness-of), becomes visible as the de-what-what of that consciousness-of, ie, the nature of the subject of an entity as such, ie The subject matter of that entity as such character of the object. And what matters to the ontology, ie what is in the ontology, ie, the subject of them, are the characteristics of the object (the constitutive characteristics of objects as objects) in the "field of being ' question. But precisely why is not them of being as such, ie, of being without objects, assumed to be no object. Phenomenology strict sense as the phenomenology of the constitution in the sense that the latter term is in the tradition of transcendental philosophy [ie, this is the concept of phenomenology in the narrow sense, MJR]. Phenomenology in the broad sense includes in its concept as understood by phenomenology indefinitely.

But such an ontology does not raise the question of what "field to be" must obtain "sense of being" (what it means to be) that is decisive and direct all the problems. That question is unknown and therefore (to the ontology) will also remain closed its own source, its origin, in Regarding the genesis of his own sense.

Therefore, the fundamental inadequacy of traditional ontology and current ontology is twofold: {3}



1) For her the issue is from the self-object principle, the objectivity of certain objects, and [ this in the sense of] object for theoretical consideration, and this in turn in a sense that has not differentiated yet unspecified, theoretical consideration, or: [for them the issue is] the self-object to certain material science nature and culture concerning the object in question [ie, they have to that object by object, for which this object is an object], and in any case [for the theme that ontology is] the world as seen through these object domains or areas of knowledge or subject areas, but not from the exsistencia [Dasein] and the possibilities of exsistencia or define the exsistencia, or also [to the ontology the issue is] a hang the object-object or being other characters apart from the theoretical [eg, evaluative character, MJR]. (Note: double meaning of "nature" as a world and as the object domain or field of knowledge, the "nature" as a formalized world comes only from the exsistencia [Dasein], historicity, therefore, (Nature) is "foundation" or "base" of its historicity (the historicity of the exsistencia) Leib also correspondingly, ie, "body" [in the sense of living body, of embodiment lived MJR].

2) What it comes, arises, is born and still is that the ontology is closed access to critical agency within the philosophical issue: what we call exsistencia [Dasein], from which and for which philosophy "is."

As the title of ontology is taken in the vague sense without compromise to which we have referred, namely, in the sense that the title refers to the whole question and all research aiming to be as such, in that sense, I say, we have no objection to using it in what follows, "ontological" then refers to the questions, explanations, concepts, categories that are born or not born of a look at the body while being.

(When searching for "ontology" is usually hand throw the old metaphysical superstition and dogmatism without the slightest chance and without even a tendency towards a kind of research that really is able to raise issues, ask questions )

(In "time" just trying to show that the ontology will also contain key issues.)

The title follows the subject and how to deal with what follows, I have to say rather: hermeneutics of facticity. PREFACE


[i]

{5} Asking questions, issues put before it, issues are not occurrences, issues are not what today is often called problems, which is cast from hand what run around and what has been read and is accompanying the gesture of being so thinking very deeply. Questions, questions, born of the discussion with "things." And there are only things which are eyes, [another translation:] things are only there where the eyes [another translation:] things are only there when there are eyes.

And this is how we will "raise" some questions here, and the more so now the question has fallen into disuse because of that eager to deal with "problems." Moreover, is secretly working on dismantling the questions become, with the intention of giving rank and excellence to the breeding and cultivation of the absence of questions that characterizes blind faith. Declares the sacred "essential law" in that case, and thus is taken seriously is [one is taken seriously] for one's own time, which because of its fragility and lack of substance is undoubtedly need it. Is not [to be is not] as anything else but because the business, the laborious occupation with problems, obstacles and keep rolling without friction, is an adult to arrange to live a lie. The philosophy interprets its own corruption as a "resurrection of metaphysics."

Companion in my search was the young Luther, and the model was Aristotle who hated Luther. Kierkegaard impulses came from me and put me eye Husserl. Be said that for those who just "get it" when they do something to reckon with in terms of historical influences, which is but the pseudoentender that characterizes the scramble for news, and therefore abhorrence of that [ie, a look away from that] it's the only thing that is decisive. Those who behave well {6} should facilitate the "trend" that characterizes his "understanding" so that they can easily sink into themselves. Well of them can not expect anything. The only thing I care about and all they grow is - "pseudo."



PART WAYS OF INTERPRETATION OF THE EXSISTENCIA [DASEIN] EXSISTENCIA BE IN EACH OF WHICH EXSISTENCIA

Facticidad is how we designate the character of being of "our" "own" exsistencia. More precisely the term means: exsistencia is in each case it is, is this exsistencia, ie, existence is to each his [the phenomenon of "each-is", the "on-each-case "cf. the phenomena of delayed, non slip, of being in it, of being in it, of being in it, which in German is said da-bei-sein, da-sein] in that the existence (according to his own being , ie according to the way of being in that is) by its nature or structure of being is "there" ist da [óigase this also in the sense that existence is the being of a there is a da , MJR].

The money "according to his way of being" or "way of being" mean the following: [the exsistencia is it] not primarily and never primarily as an object of a look from outside or as the subject of a determination resulting from looking at it from out, ie, the pure charge heard of it and gain knowledge about what has taken notice, but the exsistencia [Dasein], on how and how its being more typical, it is itself there, ist selbst da, is she there, is to be identified there, is itself to be that there. How or so that their being open and defines the "there" as possible in each case. Be, but transitive sense: to be factual life! Being itself, ie be selbst, ie being self, that is, unless he is himself, that is, unless he is to be that being, that is, being which consists in being himself, that is, be that is to be, that is, unless I repeat consists in being himself that being, that therefore he can never become the subject of a take, because of what it is about himself, ie that being, that is, to be himself that being, that is the be him, he being pregnant, of being so siéndose.

The exsistencia, while in each case the own, mine, while that of each, does not mean that relativity via singling getting the exsistencia [first considered in a generic sense] an individual from the outside and, therefore, while exsistencia itself, while that of each one, while mine does not mean the individual (solus ipse), but this being the exsistencia own, mine is a how of being, a possible indication of being awake or being awake, waking possible. But not mean, say, a regional division in the sense that we put the thing over there by way of isolating it.

And therefore, factual and factual means that which [ie, that being that] in regard to being-and that its character be, is divided from itself and "is" articulated from itself. If you take the "life" as a way of being, then "factual life" means the following: our own exsistencia (Dasein, being-there) as "there", ie while is that there ie, as consisting in being, ie siéndose while there, ie, while being there in the way of being the exsistencia that there, in one of the ways in which (for its own being or under its own being or your own form of it to be) can become expressed that the character of being [ie consisting express can become the their existence on being there, being himself so].



{9} CHAPTER ONE Hermeneutics

§ 2. Hermeneutics in its traditional concept

hermeneutic expression used here as an indication of a unitary that will be our approach, to focus, to access, interrogate, and to include the facticity.

Hermeneutik (episteme, techne), Hermeneutics (defined as knowledge or technique) is a derivative of hermeneuein, Hermeneia, Hermeneus. The etymology of the word is obscure [ii].

is placed in connection with the name of the god Hermes, the messenger of the gods.

Some events may help to define the original meaning of the word, yet understand the way you have changed meanings.

Plato poietai hoi ouden all 'e hermenês Eisin ton Theon [iii] (poets are nothing but the "performers" that the "voices" of the gods). Therefore, the bards who recite in turn make the poets can say: Oukoun hermeneon gignesthai secrecy, [iv] is not perhaps you become interpreters of interpreters, the spokesmen of the speakers? Hermeneus is someone who conveys, who reported to someone what someone else "thinks", or who becomes a mediator of this transmission or notification, that is, who in turn re-investment; cf. "The Sophist" by Plato 248 ª 5, 246e3: aphermeneue, inform, notify me what others think, tell me what others say.

The "Theaetetus", 209a5, says: Logos = he tries diaphorótetos hermeneia TES, the logos is a report, a manifest, one to express the difference from the other things (or the difference from you over other ) (but next to them and about what koinonia) [for example, that this thing, in regard to color, is green and not red like there pitched nature of insight, he said Zubiri MJR]. (Cf. Theaetetus 163C: what you see in the words and what they communicate those who explain, what we see and hear ourselves as we read and hear, and what grammarians and interpreters teach us) {10} therefore not design or interpretation or theoretical grasp but will, desire, etc., ie, be exsistencia ie, hermeneutics is to make manifest (the prior notice of) the being of beings in their being-on-a-( me.)

Aristotle: The physis is served from the tongue (glottei) for gustary to speak, and while the taste (geusis) is necessary and hence occur in most animals, the possibility to express has no other purpose than perfection, I d'hermeneia héneka eu tou [v]. (That is: the body, when it is a living, you need the language for both like to talk with others in the common dealings with them, of those two things, taste, geusis, is of necessity in relation to things (and so do most of the living), but the hermeneia, referring to something and talk about something with others (talk about something) is for good, has its reason for being in the eu in the well, ie to ensure the living his being as such (in their world and with his world). This text refers hermeneia Aristotle, then, simply and represents the dialektos, ie, conversation with others in the current deal with others and with things, but dialektos is not factual but the way in which the logos is produced, and the latter, ie the logos (the talk about something, talking, say) whose function is to deloun ... to symphéron kai to blaberón [vi], ie, provides the highlight being in its serna it helpful or harmful (ie, the logos makes accessible the body for a track done with it by putting it forward, as is whether it is appropriate or not.) See also hermeneuein

; Philostratus [vii]. Simplicii in Aristotelis Physicorum Comment [viii]. Pericles in Thucydides: "And yet you encolerizáis against a man as I believe no less than anyone to know what is necessary and explain (gnonai Deonta kai ta you hermeneusai tauta) apart from loving the city and above all bribery" [ix ].

Aristotle lego ... Lexin hen einai day onomasías hermeneia TES (I say that the language of discourse is the interpretation (thinking) through the words ...)[ x].

{11} Among the "writings" of Aristotle has been handed a hermeneia Per the title. In that letter speaks of the logos on what is the fundamental operation of this that is exposed and get acquainted with the entity. The title of the document, therefore, as just indicated is entirely appropriate. But neither Aristotle, nor his immediate successors in the Peripato, introduced the written under that title. Happened to the disciples of Aristotle on the legacy of this as an "unfinished sketch," and "Untitled." At the time of Andronicus of Rhodes that title was already common. H. Meier, who says with good reason the authenticity of the letter, assumes that the title appears for the first time in the first generation following Eudemus Theophrastus [xi].

In this context, that word as a title of a particular investigation Aristotle is not important only in relation to the history of its meaning. What he does say, the function of speech, is to become accessible as being shown something there, that is, show us something as being present there in front. And as such, the logos have that mentioned possibility of representing the aletheuein (to make available as soon uncovered, ie, leaving it open there, what was once hidden, covered, what before was not in sight what once was, but not visible). And because the letter of Aristotle speaks of it, so he is rightly called Peri hermeneia. The Byzantines widespread

this meaning of hermeneuein, and in that generalization, hermeneuein corresponds to what we call "mean", a term, or a concatenation of terms, it means something, means something, "has a meaning" (hence the meaning of Platonism) .

Philo calls Moses Hermeneus theou [xii], hermeneutics of God (poster, a preacher, reveals the will of God.)

Aristeas: ta ton Ioudaion grammata hermeneia prosdeitai [xiii] (the writings of the Jews have need of translation, interpretation). Translate: What's in a foreign language in itself make it accessible for the latter [This is the approach to be followed by moving to Heideggger into Castilian, and not to do so unintelligible, MJR]. In the mean time hermeneia Christian churches as well as comment (enarratio) eis ten hermeneia oktateuchon, comments Octateuco, Octateuco interpretation, comment, interpret, look what a properly written {12} was meant, and thus make available it said, help to access it. Hermeneia = exegesis. San Augustine

provides the first "hermeneutics" high style. Homo timens Deum, ejus in Scripturius sanctis voluntatem diligenter inquirit. Et ne certamina amet, Pietat mansuetus; praemunitus etiam scientia linguarum, ne in verbis locutionibusque ignotis haereat; praemunitus quarumdam etiam rerum necessariarum Cognition, ne earum quae propter vim naturamve similitudinem adhibentur, ignoret; adjuvant codicum etiam veritate, quam Solers emendationis diligentia procuravit: veniat ita Scripturarum paper discusses ambiguous instructus atque ad solvendo [xiv] [Castilian that means: the man who fears God, diligently seeking out in Scripture God's will. And it does so transfixed and tamed by piety, so as not to be lured by vain disputes, and provided the knowledge of languages \u200b\u200bin order not to get caught in unfamiliar words and phrases, also defended the knowledge of some things needed to order not to ignore force or the nature of things that are adduced by way of likeness, it also helps the truth of the codes he has to procure with wit and amending and correcting with diligence and cleanliness, and well educated, come to discuss and resolve ambiguous passages of Scripture MJR].

Provided "what man has to approach the interpretation of obscure passages of Scripture?: Fear God and with the sole concern of seeking his will in Scripture, formed, and pierced by the mercy In order not to be dragged by the fans to the disputes of words, armed with the knowledge of languages \u200b\u200bin order to avoid hanging in words or idioms unknown, provided the knowledge of certain objects and natural cases of Scripture given for illustration, in order not to ignore their probative value, supported by the content of truth ...

In the seventeenth century we find the Sacred Hermeneutics title for what is also known by the name of Clavis Scripturae Sacrae [xv], or ad sacral Isagoge bunk [xvi], or Tractatus de interpretatione [xvii] or sacred Philologie [xviii]. {13}

hermeneutics and interpretation is not now the same, but the theory or doctrine of the conditions of the object, means of communication to others, and the practical application of the interpretation; cf. Johannes Jakob Rambach:

(1) "De fundamentis hermeneuticae sacrae" [xix]. On the proper disposition of the interpretation of texts, the meaning of texts.

(2) "In Mediis hermeneuticae sacrae domesticis" [xx]. The analogy of faith as a principle of interpretation, the circumstances, passions, order, context, parallelism of the Scriptures.

(3) "De Mediis hermeneuticae sacrae externis et litterariis" [xxi]. On the media grammatical, critical, rhetorical, logical, and related to the various sciences. Translation and commentary.

(4) "In legitimate inventive sensus tractatione "[xxii], ie how to communicate or to test the effect found, porismática implementation and practical application. (Porismata, porizein, deduct by way of consequence or inference)

This idea of \u200b\u200bhermeneutics, seen in its full extent, and certainly lives, Schleiermacher (cf. Saint Augustine) restricts then an "art (or doctrine art or art theory) to understand "[xxiii] what another says, and puts it as a discipline in connection with the grammar, rhetoric and dialectic, the methodology is formal title includes" hermeneutic general "(theory or teaching the art to understand the speech of others, what others say) are special hermeneutics theological hermeneutics and philological hermeneutics. Boeckh

took this idea of \u200b\u200bhermeneutics in his encyclopedia and methodology of philological sciences [xxiv]. {14}

Dilthey endorsed the concept of hermeneutics of Schleiermacher as "regulation of understanding" ("doctrine or theory of art of interpreting written monuments) [xxv], but he gave him a basis to understand how such analysis, including in the context of their research on the development of the human sciences also the development of hermeneutics.

And yet, when one takes into account precisely this last point, it appears a fatal limitation for the position of Dilthey. Well, precisely because of this, he remained hidden Dilthey (in regard to the development of hermeneutics itself) the critical periods of this development (the Fathers and Luther), as he was always confined to become subject the development of hermeneutics only in the aspect that this development is highlighted the trend towards what he considered the essentials of hermeneutics, namely, to become the methodology of hermeneutics spirit. The systematic distorting today is practicing the positions of Dilthey (as, for example, Spranger), the systematic spoiling these positions, no longer comes anywhere near approaching even to approach, to those positions of Dilthey and self limited and not very transparent (and maintained with little energy) in regard to the direction of the essentials.



§ 3. Hermeneutics as self-interpretation of facticity

Well, calling hermeneutic research continues, we are not using the word in its modern sense, nor with the meaning of a theory interpretation, taken so broadly. [In our context] the term, connecting with its original meaning, means more is going to mean good or rather, a certain unity in the implementation of hermeneuein, ie the implementation of the report, the state, ie the implementation of an interpretation of facticity, which must make the listener the ceiling, the look, the apprehended and understood.

We choose the word in its original meaning because the word, albeit radically insufficient, emphasizes, however, for the record, some time working in the {15} investigation and analysis of facticity. As in regards its object, ie the object of hermeneutics, that it was, while how to address (and that is what hermeneutics is intended to be), comes to be already an indication that the subject only that which has as a subject of interpretation and in need of interpretation, that is, when that object belongs the credit of being in interpretation, ie, having to come-it-interpreted, ie moving in a intreparetado-ness, that is, moves into a coming-it-interpreted. Hermeneutics is the task of making itself accessible exsistencia (in his capacity of being) to the same exsistencia, in communicating, in tell, told, to make inquiry of this sort of autoextrañamiento, the suffering that comes exsistencia and taxed and traded. Hermeneutics in shape for the exsistencia a possibility, namely to become entendiente for itself and be entendiente for itself.

This understanding that comes and wakes up in the interpretation, in no way can compare with that one act-on-a-la-life-of-other in terms of knowledge, ie is it something entirely different, it is not an act-on-a, a been-about (ie, not intentional), but a exsistencia how the same [ie, has no character concept, but "physical", which would Zubiri MJR], to fix this terminological, let's say right away that this is the be-awake, that is, of being-in-exsistencia vigil for herself.

Hermeneutics is not a way hash dictated by curiosity, and imposed artificially cultivated exsistencia flippantly to the outside. From the facticity itself is where we must find out to what extent and when that facticity requires something like the interpretation which we are referring to talk of hermeneutics. The relationship between hermeneutics and factuality is not the relationship that exists between the apprehension of an object and the object apprehended, the apprehension that simply had to accommodate, but the play itself is a possible and pointed out how (and signaled a possible way to be) the character of being of facticity. The interpretation is being (ie, ingredient entitative) [ingredient "physical" Zubiri would MJR] the being of the same factual life. If the facticity (of course, inappropriately) you want to call "object" of hermeneutics (as plants are the subject of botany), then it (the hermeneutic) would be reached and caught by surprise and trapped, its own object (similar to as if they were what plants are and how they are, because there are botanical and from botany).

The said "connection to be", ie the connection entitative [physical MJR] that hermeneutics saved with the object, make your way of approaching things, execution or exercise preceding temporary appropriation (both form factual and by the structure of being involved here) for that operation (in this respect) might be made of any science. {16} The possibility of failure is a basic event, which belongs to be the company's own hermeneutics. The nature of evidence of the explicit holding of the exsistencia, is essentially labile; evidence ascribing an ideal to want to attribute even the exaggerated ideal of evidence that represents the ideal of "intuition of essence" would be an ignorance of what can and should hermeneutics.

hermeneutic research topic is in each case the exsistencia own, which asks hermeneutic for his "character to be" to develop a wake (vigil) of itself for itself, growing from the own exsistencia roots and has to do with them. Being factual life is characterized not only the "how" (ie, in the form of being) that represents Being self-potential, ie being self-potential, ie, consisting of himself into a being-possible, in the form himself into a possibility. The possibility himself more suited to the exsistencia (facticity) is, and without that possibility is one thing that is 'there', let's call Existenz or exist. And the prospect of this being properly she is like (using the approach is to ask how hermeneutics) will be included in our facticity (call it that) prae-be, ie what we have in advance , in that from which and in which order to become the object of interpretation facticity; conceptual ingredients that we will emerge as a result of this interpretation will call the existential [or existential if we follow the translation of D. José Gaos].

"apprehend," "grab", enter conceptually, that is Begriff, begreifen in German, does not refer to a scheme, but a possibility of the exsistencia, the possibility of stare and repair itself and therefore constitute the stare and reoparar itself, ie the possibility of Augenblick and thus constitutive of the Augenblick, "concipere", apprehend, catch, enter a meaning derived conceptually (sample and implies a prae-habere, one already in it beforehand, ie, a being in the basic experience from which and in view of the interpretation is made, involves prae-conceptio, ie pre-arrest, calls for how the reference (the address) and question the exsistencia ie, a put, a exsistencia get into line with the trend to self-interpretation that characterizes it and under it concerns the basic concepts [associated with it or where it is plasma] are elements that give a posteriori, but are the tractor bearing element and putting forward ahead whatever that is, putting forward the issue, for that set or Augenblick, allow us to grasp, grab the exsistencia in the manner and form it has. The prae-

habere of interpretation, the child can not be thematically presented as a simple referral object, tell it, it runs out, is precisely a sign of his character-of-being (the nature of being of praehabere of that we started taking) as an ingredient not only establishing but also crucial to an interpretation that she is the co-there (in the exsistencia or being-there is), it shares the character of being that there: be-possible possibility of being itself. This being-possible is delimited, and may vary based on the factually own situation, which in each case, straighten the hermeneutical question, to which it is, the prae-habere is not, therefore, discretionary and arbitrary.

"Life leaves only explain if it is lived, as also Christ did not begin to explain {17} and to show how the Scriptures teach about him, just as he rose from the dead." Kierkegaard, Diario 15. IV. 1838. [Xxvi]

issues and uncertainties in hermeneutics and questionable, problematical and uncertain of their purpose: the object: the exsistencia only in itself [ie exsistencia it can only be same, ie only being herself, or is just being herself what it is, that is, only siéndose, ie there is only herself to be so]. The exsistencia is, but only while en route from itself to itself. This way of being of hermeneutics can not be eliminated, it can not be treated as something that can artificially replaced. This must be taken into account decisive. This is reflected in how you have to anticipate, how to jump forward (to cover the whole) and what is the only way to go. Well ahead does not mean setting a term, a say, here comes the object, but precisely to take into account the "on track" the release, the open, the being-possible capture or being-in-able.

this issue or problem or hermeneutics basic uncertainty also reflects a fundamental question regarding the prae-habere, to advance what we have. This issue is reflected, contrabrilla, ie, shines in all characters to be with us to characterize the exsistencia; problematic, ontic issue or issues: care, restlessness, anxiety, temporality. In such a challenge or problem and it is only where we should take or take over the situation in which or for which there may be something like: set the term, set order, seize the end. Well this can happen only where there is something fixable or verifiable precisely the fact of not fixed, and that as a way to be the exsistencia or being-there. How does that relate to all this the problem of death? The hermeneutic

is where it starts to develop the position or situation from which we can ask a radical way, without using the traditional theme that represents the idea of \u200b\u200bman. (Having-questionably, having but as a problem, just referred to, which characterizes the prae-habere, to what we started to have, ie that the existence of which is fixable but not set it as a way of being of exsistencia precisely as a problem of structure, constitution or nature of existence, if in general we have to deal somehow, from this point, is not it visible to be-possible in their specific character and exsistencial autonomous, ie concerning the Existenz, the small drop?).

addition, the interpretation takes as a starting point today, that is, making a starting point the compressibility determined average rate that particular understanding of that philosophy through the lives and zurückspricht that philosophy, ie, retro- speech, namely that philosophy (of denial) just talking, that is, that ends up being the recipient of the filofía live in it for him. The Se, each has something determinedly positive, it represents only a phenomenon of fall, or the phenomenon of a fall, but it is as such a "how" (a way of being) of the exsistencia factual.

The circle or sphere of comprehensibility of the factual (the circle or sphere of being factually understanding) is something that can never be measured or calculated in advance. And equally, the way that this circle, this area of \u200b\u200bunderstanding, has to operate, the way it becomes effective, it can not regulate guided by the understanding and communication of mathematical results. But in the background, even this is irrelevant, since hermeneutics puts us in a situation and it is from this situation where it is possible to understand.

{18} There is a "universal" hermeneutic of understanding if not the formal side of it [ie, the formal side of this understanding], and even when it has such universal ingredients, all hermeneutics is to understand itself and understand their tasks would have no choice but to take distance from them and return to the exsistencia in each case the re-factual that exsistencia careful in calling attention to herself. The element "formal" is never autonomous, but that only represents a certain loading, a load relief, aid mundane. For the purpose of hermeneutics is not to be a charge notice of something, but the aim of hermeneutics is exsistencial knowledge, ie, the goal of hermeneutics is to be a being. That is, speech hermeneutics come from the exsistencia interpreted for itself and speaks for that interpreted the exsistencia come to herself, that is, speaking from and for the come-interpreted-the-exsistencia, ie, speaking from and for non-be-the-existence-but-in-this-coming-it-played-for-itself.

The hermeneutical wager that over which, so to speak, as it puts everything on a letter, ie "how what "in which, as it were, is apprehended in advance of facticity, ie the critical nature of being, in terms of understanding which begins the facticity (ie, the character of being on the start betting) is not a inventum, ie not something that you invent or find, but it is something we have in advance, but that "as what" is something that springs (which comes from) a fundamental experience, ie , which in this case arises from a philosophical to be watchful and alert, in which exsistencia meets herself. We call this the exsistencia be-careful philosophical, and that means: it is a be-this-wake that remains vivid in (or lives and feeds on) an original self-interpretation that philosophy itself has given of herself, so that self-interpretation is [in that its originality and radicalism] a decisive possibility of encountering a critical form the exsistencia herself.

The basic contents of this self-interpretation of philosophy, this understanding of philosophy about itself, must be able to put in relief and must indicate in advance. For hermeneutics we speak of that content reads as follows: (1) Philosophy is a form of knowledge that is or is in the same factual life in the form of knowledge which exsistencia factual is started, so to speak, of himself openly and nakedly returning on itself, and mercilessly going to settle on the base rate for it is she that she is being to himself. (2) Philosophy while this philosophy (as understood this radical form of philosophy) is not in any way for custom work and caring for humanity as a whole and the culture of all, much less the exempt once and for all future generations of concern to ask questions, or even to reduce that concern through validity claims that would be out of place. The philosophy is what can be, just as philosophy their "time." "Temporary." Mode of being-now is what works the exsistencia.

But this thing has absolutely nothing to do with being as modern as possible, ie, to engage him grace to what is usually meant by needs and alleged shortcomings. Everything modern is known as {19} artificially drained of their own time and only then gets to have some "effect" (business, propaganda, proselytizing, search applause applause and economy, cultural scam.) That as

what exsistencia, a stay-awake maintained in such terms, it runs itself, ie, character if it is not likely to be calculated in advance and is not intended to humanity in general, anything aimed at an audience, but is determined and decisive exsistencia concrete possibility in each case, ie, the specific factual each case, ie, in each specific factual. To the extent that it does capture, apprehend and bring hermeneutic of facticity apprehended the conceptual grasp, that is, put it in concepts, such a possibility will become more transparent. But "at a time" is spent and consumes itself. Existenz, existing, while the exsistencia historic opportunity, but can be determined in each case has already damaged itself in each case as that which arises is whether the requirement will be present beforehand itself to a philosophical curiosity that seeks to portray. Existenz is never "object" but to be, only in that there is "a life that is, as frost there in a particular life.

And as the stakes or attack is only there in those terms, that is, only exists in such terms, not subject to reason or public speculation or public discussion. As these are merely the preferred means of diverting time the potential impact that might have bet on exsistencia factual. The two requirements today often proclaimed so often and so high, namely: (1) that one should not linger too much on the budget but go on to consider the things themselves (philosophy of the thing), and (2) that budgets must be able to take up the public, so that the view in general (which are visible to all) and that are generally convincing, that is, that budgets have to be as inoffensive as possible, ie, plausible, both demands, say, wrapped themselves with the aura and the appearance of a purely objective absolute philosophy. Masked, but only a cry to the anguish that philosophy produces.

The question of where it belongs then this hermeneutical task within the framework of "the" philosophy, is a very secondary question, which basically irrelevant, if not a question of principle misconceived. The strange coincidence of the title [of the plaintiff to the title of hermeneutics] should not confuse us and lead us to adhere to as empty considerations [a walk to see where to place it within "the" philosophy]. {20}

Hermeneutics, in the absence (while not giving, while not "here") on the exsistencia be awakened (the serdespierta the exsistencia) for the actuality, while this does not happen, I say, is irrelevant. All talk about it is a fundamental and basic misunderstood herself. For my part, I suspect, if I may use this personal observation, that the interpretation is not at all philosophy, but something provisional, which, however, something happens very own peculiar, namely that is not to end it as soon as possible, but it should be delayed as much as possible.

Today we have become so featureless beings and so no bones that we are not able to hold a question and if a doctor can not respondérnosla philosophical, we ran to find another. And such a claim (doctors) can only increase supply. In plain language this is called: increased interest in philosophy.

Hermeneutics is not itself philosophy wants nothing to present to contemporary philosophers (if they deign to consider) an object hitherto forgotten. The secondary that such things do not get attention in the great bustle current philosophy, should not attract attention, when in her than it is mostly (or all efforts are focused on) not to be late or too late for the "resurrection of metaphysics" that "is what is said, begins to emerge, and where only known a concern, namely, to help yourself and help others to achieve via intuition of essences direct friendship with the good Lord to make it as cheap as possible, as comfortable as possible and as profitable as possible.

[Add Heidegger: "nothing to be measured by criteria and frameworks strange and questionable accentuate this as fundamental"]