The Moment

My book, The Moment, published by Splice, can be ordered here.

Dead man, dead man

Is it perhaps because we live in a philosophical age that cannot bear broaching metaphysical or ontological issues and questions? Is it perhaps because we live in an age that cannot bear that there may be more than human being and the “world” that we construct? Is it perhaps because we live in an age that cannot bear the thought that there may be an ultimate underlying unifying unity to all things that beckons us to listen in awed silence and that is the Source of joy for us beyond every heartache? These are important questions for us in the present age, and I suggest that we need to be more attentive to them.

Richard Capobianco

Advertisement

Armageddon

They want to fuck up our hippocampuses. The ability to learn. Our emotional stability. That’s what they want to target. To create a new neural network in the brain. Rewiring the human nervous system. To trap us in Hell.

It’s neurodegeneration everywhere. All around us. It’s all conformity, obedience. People are turning into zombies. Their frontal lobes are fucked. The high centres of the brain. All the fine tuning’s gone. All the subtlety. Humane thinking. Empathy. All going. Love – the capacity to love. Civilization’s the central cortex. That’s what they’re demolishing.

They’re creating the kind of masses that they want.

This is Armageddon. This is the apocalyptic battle. Taking evil to a level never before seen.

Satan is behind this. Someone who hates the world as it is. Who hates creation as it is. Where it’s not enough to own everything living, but to take possession and control living things in their essence.

It’s out in the open. They’re not trying to sneak up on the herd anymore.

There’s aluminium, barium, strontium in rain. The rain, like, foams.

They don’t need us to make money, they don’t need our taxes, they print money for whatever they want.

The mercantile era is coming to an end. This is the neo-feudal era.

They’re breaking in the new system. Everything’s lined up – every major logistical element.

The population is a liability. They want to thin out the herd.

It’s cognitive infiltration. They’re letting the IQ points fall.

We’re being prepped. They’re programming us – remote controlling us.

It was a slow-kill programme. Now it’s a fast-kill programme. Things are speeding up.

They’re going to modify every species on the planet.

We’re in tune. We sense things. The shifting narratives. There are so many battle fronts. So many battle lines.

The ownership of humans: that’s what they’re aiming at. The ownership of the entire world. The digitalisation of everything that can be traded or used as a medium of exchange.

— Lars Iyer, from a novel in progress

Every leaf seems to speak

Hermeneutical thinking in general is focused on the human being “hearkening” to other human beings and engaging in “dialogue,” in good faith, in the pursuit of a (finite and fragile) shared understanding. Yet Heidegger is clear in this lecture course (and in many other places) that our legein, our “gathering” (the “knowing” and “wisdom” spoken of in Heraclitus’s sayings), is first and foremost a matter of the silent (and obedient) hearkening to “the voice” of Being as the primordial Logos, “the primordial fore-gathering” (242–6, 383). It would seem, then, that from his perspective the primary focus in Hermeneutics on “dialogue” among human beings (as constitutive and important as this surely is) is misplaced because such conversation cannot have the proper depth and discovery unless we have first listened attentively to the “saying” of the Being-way itself. It is our attunement to Being that matters in the first place, and – let us put this plainly – this does not require social or communal discourse. As he remarks in the lecture course, our “highest possible relation” is with Being, a relation that “grounds all other human relations to human beings and to things” (294). For the later Heidegger in particular, the rich solitude of silent listening to Being-physis-Logos as it unfolds is the primary way. Yet paradoxically, it is also the way that leads to perhaps the richest kind of community – the “community” of all mortals and beings and things as they come forth from out of the Being-way and go forth the same way. Arriving, lingering, departing; everything “breathing in and out.” We might add, and only gently so, that this meditative way appears to be increasingly lost or forgotten in the contemporary world, not only in our intensely “connected” culture, but also in the various recent versions of hermeneutical thinking that focus almost exclusively on the linguistic, the social, and the political.

[…] We may move closer to Heidegger’s way of thinking by considering the ways of those who have been imbued with a deep reverence for Nature, someone like the great American naturalist John Muir:

When one is alone at night in the depths of these woods, the stillness is at once awful and sublime. Every leaf seems to speak.

Every leaf seems to speak. In stillness, we “hear” the leaf and the flower, the wind and the rain, the sun and the moon “speaking.” Muir’s words resonate with us, but more often than not our way to a fuller understanding and appreciation of them is blocked because we are so accustomed in the contemporary world to think that the human being is the source and measure of all “saying.”

— Capobianco, Heidegger’s Way of Being

Like a python swallowing a pig

For skandinaviske laesere: Essays af Alexander Carnera

‘Being is still waiting for the time when It itself will become thought-provoking to the human being.’

— Heidegger, ‘Letter on Humanism’ (tr. Capuzzi)

Objectifying

Our everyday experience of things, in the wider sense of the word, is neither objectifying nor a placing over against. When, for example, we sit in the garden and take delight in a blossoming rose, we don’t make an object of the rose, nor do we even make it something standing over against us in the sense of something represented thematically. When in tacit saying we’re enthralled with the lucid red of the rose and muse on the redness of the rose, then this redness is neither an object nor a thing nor something standing over against us like the blossoming rose. The rose stands in the garden, perhaps sways to and fro in the wind. But the redness of the rose neither stands in the garden nor can it sway to and fro in the wind. All the same we think it and tell of it by naming it. There is accordingly a thinking and saying that in no manner objectifies or places things over against us.

Heidegger, ‘Phenomenology and Theology, Some Pointers with Regard to the Second Theme’, tr. Hart and Moraldo