And taking on cue Your imprimatur to go on with this,
I return to ontology, Your and mine favorite underlying ground, without which, the edifice of the above would not hold up, after Sartre’s disillusionment with communism.
The word salad part is at once a schizophrenic derealization from conventional literature to free flow type writing, and the similarity can be noted, as perhaps avaunt guard may make another leap from the likes of Joyce, Gertrude Stein, and others.
Meaning has lost its associative bearings, and the reader is asked to work with the writer to fill in associations of his/her regard, making such writings both confusing and challenging. Literature is becoming less literal, as a result of the effects of entropy, on all forms of art. (A popular word around here)
Now having expunged that demon, I go to the reduction of phenomenology it’s self, toward the very basic idea, and I will read Your new post on the impossibility of nothingness, thinking it has bearing on what we are discussing.
Poverty briefly, it is the predicate we are dealing with, What preceeds what, the idea (of the will) or, it’s representation, in the formation of the meaning of the world(Scopenhauer’s words), but substitute existence. As with all triads, the World, the Will, and it’s representation, has precedence with Existence, Essence, and Being, of the Arabian philosopher Averroes, and Avicenna, so it’s noting new, new garments old ideas.
But with Schopenhauer placing the will squarely in the middle, suggesting that it is existentials which have put the will in a precarious position, he places blame on existence, hence assigns it as vain. (The vanity of existence.). He sees no exit from here, and becomes a Buddhist, because traditional Christianity is under attack as well, due to the denigration of the Roman Church by Protestanism.
Nietzhe sees this problem, and says, we do not worry about the existential priority, because essentially (here comes the word essence again), Being and the Will, are related. It is the Dasein, which derives it’s power from the mythological power of pre-conscious symbols, from which it has been truncated by a false morality. He wants to unbound a newly formed ideal paradigmn. Existence does not exist for him in the way existentialists think of it, it is derivative of being and not the other way around. Existentialists turned this around for political reasons for the most part, because at once they wished French philosophy again to become a centerpiece of a new rationality. It is fortunate, or not, that they too,failed, due again to the non workable (ethically) social -Communist contract, as represented by Sartre.
The post modernists have to deal with this in fragmented ways, and this disassociation is made somewhat credible by the likes of Attari and Deleuze, who feel the actual social-political consequences of a materialistic capitalism to blame for the anomanolous relationship arising between the literal world of art, and the cut up , disassociated world of the schizophrenic. Anti psychiatry could as well be as will be a rallying cry of the new disassembled world of meaningful communication.
Where does this duality take us? Into the darkness of bedlam, or the lightness of new art forms, reacting to the seemingly bottomless re-entry into Plato’s cave, of literal forms? This thinning out of symbolic richness coinciding with the one dimensional linguistic devolution of the disassociated meaning?
granted, this would be a critical point for both rationality and art, and the brakes were applied to stop this from happening around ca. 1969.
The abyss, almost looked back meeting it’s own gaze.
This is the hermaneutic of reason, colliding with the positivist vision of solubility through linguistic analysis. Hermenautics win hands down, as some would claim. (this is why psycho analysis is seen as a failed endeavor, in part)