"When I embarked on my degree course in philosophy at the
University of Basel in 1949, Jaspers was a celebrity; his lectures were
marked by overwhelming eloquence, he filled the main lecture theatre on
every occasion, and he self-assuredly promulgated his knowledge, which
extended far beyond European philosophy; he stood tall and dignified,
and carried himself like a true man of the world.
By stark contrast, Heinrich Barth was severely handicapped,
lectured at impossible hours (from 7 to 8 a.m. in the summer term),
hunched over his manuscript, speaking in a quiet voice and adverse to
any rhetorical pose. Attendance at his lectures was scant and his
seminar groups could often be counted with two hands; classes were held
in the cramped premises of the philosophy department on the
Münsterplatz; minutes had to be taken, philosophical texts were
interpreted in class, and only original-language texts were permitted.
For many students, Jaspers' Swiss colleague was simply non-existent.
...
Jaspers waged a battle against Southwest German Neo-Kantianism (Heinrich Rickert)."
Armin E. Wildermuth, "Karl Jaspers and the Concept of Philosophical Faith"
(link)
На тоя Хайнрих Барт слон му бил стъпил на ушите: Барт (ясперски,
"Sollen" vs. "Müssen") виждал как се образува битие, не чувал обаче
въплъщението, никаква муза ("mögliche Existenz") не чувал... Все едно
Зигфрид кове меча си, докато Миме забърква отрова (звучи фригийски
лад... и най-ярката за мен сцена от "Пръстена":
link).
Само дето тъкмо тая тенекеджийска екзалтация е отвратила Ницше...
Ясперс е хеви-метъл-философът*... нежната струна на моята душа резонира
не изобщо по метъла, а по Lzzy. И никаква лекция не съм в състояние да
изнеса... Цялата статия на Wildermuth, би могло по нея да бъда напълно
разбран, ти вече си ме усетил. Застъпен ли е у нас Ясперс в противовес
на Хайдегер?
Това е Lzzy:
"... to safeguard 'the survival of mankind' through universal communication" (статията на Wildermuth).
Рупорът в лоното на живеца:
"Philosophical faith refers to itself and to an origin" (статията на Wildermuth).
----------
*
"In an ontological sense, ciphers are nothing, and yet not nothing
either. They have a floating character, which on some occasions refers
beyond itself, and on others collapses into objectivity and bodily
existence. They are destroyed in both cases. There must be an
existential impetus that preserves their condition of
being-something-and-not-nothing (...) and thus allows them to mirror
existence itself. Being-oneself and recovering from not-being-oneself
fuse into a movement that drives existence at once into itself and
beyond itself. It is accepted that existence-itself bears something dark
and incomprehensible, even negative, and continuously integrates this
aspect. The question has been raised, and quite rightly, why ciphers are
needed at all. Kant... In Jaspers, cipher-script is much more than an
'interpretation' of nature's beautiful figurativeness, for with him
everything can become a cipher. This should be understood entirely in
terms of an existential-personal hermeneutic, which might prompt one to
think of once-fashionable 'individual mythology' (Harald Szeemann). But
ciphers thicken into cultural symbols, and thus become effective in the
lifeworld. We now need to inquire whether the floating, independent
existence of such symbol-ciphers (Lzzy - б. м.) could not perhaps
have repercussions on the living. The distinct phenomenality of ciphers
cannot simply be a reflex of deep existential events, for how could a
new and more profound existential knowledge be awakened by a deepening
in the self-evidentiality of the ciphers? The later Schelling's...
Kierkegaard... Curiously, Jaspers (неговият нихилизъм - б. м.)
evinces such a mindset at the end of his book on the atom bomb, namely
in those passages in which he employs the notion of immortality as a
cipher and penetrates its content. This cipher focuses on the possible
non-reality or annihilation of the world as a whole in the face of the
total threat confronting mankind in the form of nuclear disaster. The
detour through a nothingness that we ourselves might bring about
inflames the world of appearances, altering their radiance." (Статията на Wildermuth.)
