Impossible totalizing of History
The philosophers do not escape the temptation of the eternal return. Such is their strong libido to embrace the worrying opening of historical time while bringing it back to the reason of the construction of a 'system'. But the 'philosophies of History' which claim 'to buckle' up the totality of History in the safety and the closing of a system always invariably failed.
Impossible return in the eternal return… The nostalgia to seek refuge in the centre of the loop may be huge, but that is from now on impossible. You cannot return for a second time in the maternal womb. Once contaminated by historical concern it is impossible to get back any more the innocence of the eternal return. The human condition is irremediably delivered to adventure and risk. Nevertheless he can try to buckle 'virtually' the loop of his comprehension. By building a philosophy of History. Every philosophy of History wants thus to bring back History in the bosom of the reason. Their failure is however obvious. The reason of History, indeed, is not in the reason but in the opening of History which crucifies the reason.
We are irreversibly embarked. Our comprehension is it also irremediably embarked. Not only history is in exodus but also the intelligibility of history and its sense. Being in exodus without recourse, our reason is inevitably tempted by the cycle. Philosophies of history want to bring back history to reason. But the reason of history is not in the reason but in the history which crucifies the reason.
Philosophies of history are despaired efforts to knot again the wire which is reeled out of our range. These efforts try to deny the abrupt opening of the historical adventure without ever really succeeding. Unless being satisfied with the appearance of a success which, actually, is nothing else than a rationally disguised return in the cycle of the eternal return, with the secret wish not to be embarked without recourse but to master, at least intellectually, the situation.
philosophy of History is each time born from the concern of placing
the dubious adventure within a more rationally save-making framework.
It is a question of understanding the past; it is still more a
question of being located in the present; it is especially a question
of dealing with the surprises of the future. To embrace the unknown
brings intellectual satisfaction. It can defuse our existential
threats. It may also, alas, control and dominate the human
One starts by extrapolating a historical segment and projecting it in the future. These two moments raise from the start of insurmountable difficulties. Is it possible to extrapolate and project another thing that of a relative one? Which part for which whole? Isn't this extrapolated portion of history ridiculously disproportionate compared to the totality of History? When we say history, which is the 'thickness' of timing we are located in and speaking about? The 'module' whose generalization and projection in the future allows a philosophy of history, which scale is it to be determined from? Is one century of material progress enough to justify its continuation ad infinitum and to affirm that the whole history is progress? What is a century, what are ten centuries, what are thousand centuries in comparison with the total History?
What do we know about historical times? Is it homogeneous or heterogeneous? What is more relevant, the continuous line or the ruptures? Where is the decisive one? Is it in evolution or in revolutions? Which past? The past in its totality escapes from us. It is never but one certain length more or less elucidated according to the epistemological possibilities of the present. Is only one certain reading always possible of one certain historical past. This past is revisable and, in fact, unceasingly re-examined. The model intended to be projected in the future is thus always relative. Relative in its framing. Relative in its contents. Relative in its form. To project this relative design in the totality of the future can be only an extremely hazardous undertaking. We can only project in the future uncertainties of the present nourished of just some certainties of the past.
And which future? Only now is reality. The past is not any more. The future is not yet. The possibilities about the past are very relative. As for the future, it is mostly the domain of the impossible one, although it interests us primarily. Projection is thus our only possibility face to our impossibility on the future. What is worth such constructions starting from such projections? Can they be something else than only ideal constructions, necessarily dependant on one a priori since the future escapes any possible experience? They are thus only assumptions and as such subjected to the confirmation or the invalidation a posteriori of a future once accomplished.
To assign an 'end' to History, it would be necessary that one can consider it starting from its term or from its fence. However we are embarked in the middle of the History. The question of the sense of History is compromised with our adventure. It is heavy weight of the human decision through uncertainty and risk. The sense of History is in exodus. The sense of History is readable neither in the events themselves nor in their empirical unfolding. The sense of History can only transcend phenomenal events. It is not in the events, it crosses them. It comes from the other dimension of History, namely of its trans-historic verticality.
Hermeneutic circle. The intelligibility of one time of history implies the intelligibility of the whole history… which is not possible but from one moment of history. The comprehension of the present determines the comprehension of the past. There is thus a past only according to a present. In addition the comprehension of the past determines the comprehension of the present. There is thus a present only according to a past. The intelligence is caught in the wheel of the hermeneutic circle. Historical intelligibility is condemned to turn around the subject-object ratio of history. Because man is both at the same time, historical object and historical subject. Consequently the object cannot be something else than the adventure of the subject himself, and the subject cannot be something else than the self-comprehension of the object which he is himself. Man, finally, has to value. Our judgements on history are inevitably also value judgements. But aren't the criteria of these values largely the fruit of history?
|01 Human Paradox A paradoxal animal Human paradox In rupture An animal in crisis An animal 'less' (something) Premature and naked Child of the difference Child of elsewhere||02 Verticality Middle and extremes Tropism to upwards Divine instinct The vertical living Vertical interiority The personal mystery In strict immanence||03 Gaping Depths Gaping deepness Child of gaping Gaping on an other order Gaping of meaning Gaping on the questioning Gaping of matter Gaping of existence In vertical gaping Negative anthropology|
|04 Sacral Difference Sacral dimension The sacral difference Sacral crisis The archaeological sacred Sacral verticality Hiero-tropic space-time||05 Human Environment Human space Closed and open Curvature of space Negative space Space of the sense Including and included Between Alpha and Omega||06 The Matrix of Humanity Child of a culture Human matrix Culture and cultures Master speech Refusing the enclosures|
|07 The Spirit The spiritual reality How define it? Going through DIS-tinction The spirit says no Dialectics||08 Spiritual Breath Breathing Spiritual energy Making sense To signify Sense is through gaping Speech and language Symbol Faith||09 The Sense of Sense The Sense The space of the sense The house of the sense Including and included sense Confinement Master and possessor of sense|
|10 The Reason Science Constituted and constituent Scientific dialectics Bubble Between Structure and sense||11 The Meaning Demiurge of the significances Through To run here and there Mechanism Trough articulation Articulable matter||12 Systems Analysis Systemics The system Systemic operation Energy Tanks|
|13 Oïkology Impossible closing Systemic totality The house of the spirit Ecology We sinned||14 Exodus Spiritual adventure Out of safety measures Out of the cave Logos in exodus||15 Through Difference Difference Starting from difference Crossing the duality A logic of crossing Chance|
|16 Dialectics Going through 'no' Fundamental dynamics Dia-logos The fourth dimension Passover dialectics||17 Alliance Broken Alliance Rupture of the bond The prodigal son Atheism State of grace||18 History Emergence of History Impossible totalizing Trans-historic verticality The sense in exodus Between Alpha and Omega|
|19 Fertile Confrontation Singular adventure Dialectical gestation Antithesis Two revolutions Exponents A long gestation Explosiveness||20 Progress What is progress? Source of The progress Exponential acceleration The tool of progrès Why it isn't working Wedged exponential growth Progressive illusion||21 Schizoid Tautological speech Idealism Master and possessor Flirt with nothingness God driven out Without the Father Without recourse Psychosis|
|22 The Other One Arising The other one Exposed To tell the other one||23 Adventurers Components and exponents Adventurers of eschatology Today||24 Through Scandal Gaping mystery of evil Trough distance Congenital evil Entropy in the human hearth|
|25 Agape Gaping of Eros Captive desire Eros and Agape Going down Defeated entropy||26 God in You Tropism for Agape Bottomless bottom Cleaning the sources Let you fall You fall into God||Autor|