💀 Vengeful Revenant 🔥
@marxismevolving.bsky.social
485 followers 514 following 1.9K posts
Ryan He/Him 💕 @deepstatedani.bsky.social “Do not remember the former things, nor consider the things of old. I am about to do something new; now it springs forth, do you not perceive it? I will make a way in the wilderness and rivers in the desert.”
![$18. Being-bound-up-with and Signification
107
one constituting whatever arises in a workshop as at hand (its at-hand-ness), is "earlier" than any one individual instrument—in the same way as the wholeness of a farm is "earlier," with all its equipment, buildings, and fields. Yet the wholeness of being-bound-up itself ultimately comes back to a toward-which no longer having a bound-up-ness, one that is not itself a being having its being the way things at hand do within a world; rather, it comes back to a being whose being is determined as being-in-world, one to whose essential constitution worldliness belongs. This primary toward-which is not a for-something-else, not a what-for of some binding. The primary toward-which is a for-the-sake-of-which. And this "sake" always concerns the being of being-there— for which, in its very being, its being is at issue. For the moment we shall not pursue this inter-connectedness any further, one leading from the structure of being-bound-up to the being of being-there, i.e., to the authentic and single for-the-sake-of-which. Before doing this, we must clarify the "getting bound up" to such an extent that we can bring the phenomenon of worldliness into the focus necessary for detecting the problems regarding it.
[MY NOTE: H. will now attempt to “clarify”]
Ontically, letting-be-bound-up means this: within the course of some factical taking-care, letting something at hand be such-and-sucha — as it now is and so that it is such. We construe this ontic meaning of "letting be" in a fundamentally ontological manner. We thereby interpret the meaning of the precedental release of inner-worldly things as they are first of all at hand. To let something "be" precedentally does not mean to bring it into its being from scratch, to produce it; rather, it means to uncover something that already "is," to uncover it in its at-hand-ness, and uncover something that already "is," to uncover it in its at-hand-ness, and in this way to let the being](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:led6y2n2jbfm3pame3crx3kb/bafkreieflimdmzox6oeuvolceb5jf22lyl2zmszh443u77am2s4yi44nxu)
