QT Definitions, Part 1

Here are some of my cogitations on what some of the specific vocabulary in QT means and how it relates to his overall point. These are tentative, and thinking on them has cuased me to call some of my former interpretations into question.

Essence – The essence of a thing (ex. Technology) is not the genus that overarches all particular examples of that thing which, by their possession of the distinct group of qualities unique to that category, are said to participate in it and derive the characteristics from it which are necessary to be called an example of it. Since H later defines Enframing as the essence of technology, this would mean that all technological artifacts were kinds of Enframings, but this makes no sense as Enframing is not an instrument. Rather, essence is more like the way that which a thing comports itself through time, enduringly. For essence (Wesen) comes from the word for tarry or dwell (wesen) which H indentifies with endure (wahren) and which survives in German in inflected forms of to be (sein) and present (anwesend). When H says essence, he means something very much like “the way in which a thing comes into being present and how it endures as such through time” over and against the Latin quidditas which we usually mean. See translators note P. 3, discussion of essence p. 29-31

Destining – I remain unsure exactly how to characterize Destining. Previously I was conceiving of it as the way in which a mind applies structures of perception and conception to the pure coming to presence if the world, of Being, in and of itself, and sets it up to be interpreted in a certain way; for example, the way Enframing, in the context of modern physics, is “setting nature up to exhibit itself as a coherence of forces calculable in advance, it therefore orders experiments precisely for the purpose of asking whether and how nature reports itself when set up in this way.” (p.21) Hence “destining of revealing” would be man’s act of actively Enframing nature. (Here it is necessary to point out that I am unsure whether Destining refers for some reason specifically to the act of Enframing, or if under destining a pluralistic infinitude of ways representing the world is denoted, or only those representations which set up the world in ways similar to Enframing) And not merely man’s cognitive act is Destining, but also something more, namely this: the consuming environment in which man both sets Being up into the framework of efficiency etc, but is also induced to do so by being challenged to do so, be being set up into it himself by the world. To wit, the world presents itself in this way rather than merely being represented by us in this way.

But upon further consideration I come to suspect that Destining admits of these elements also: Destining is the German Geschick, from schicken, which means to send, or start upon a way towards a destination. I think with this H means to invoke the notion that the giving of a specific character to the unconcealing of being (this process is called Revealing) by putting it into a framework, sends man and all revealing on a way that possess a certain kind of momentum, such that it sweeps him up and pushes to its consummation. It has a potential state, and progresses towards it. P.23-25

As an important note: Destining is close to man’s true essence. Part of what H is calling for, is man’s awakening to a free relationship to the revealing of the world, such that he recognizes that in revealing it/being revealed, it is being both unconcealed and concealed, and therefore to recognize that the act/occurrence of Destining is also such. Enframing is forgetful of the fact that is a kind of unconcealing/concealing and therefore runs the risk of blinding man to his essence as essentially one who destins revealing. Again, H is calling for man’s coming to self-consciousness of his essence as one who destins, which requires a consciousness of the essence of Destining. P.25-29

Revealing – If Destining is to send something on its way towards arriving, Revealing is what is being sent. To be revealed is to come forth from hither out of concealment into unconcealment. In German, there is an etymological resonance between revealing (Entbergen) conceal (verbergen) and unconcealment (Unverborgenheit), etc. This idea is essentially similar to Greek poiesis and entails not just the bringing forth from out of the four causes characteristic of the artisan, but also the bursting forth of nature in and of itself, physis. What is revealed, or what is given aspect due to the unique character of its concealment/unconcealment, is what is thought of archaically as truth; aletheia or veritas. See P.10-12