This Feeling Of Uneasiness Is Surely Bound To Be Transformed Into The Conviction That The Whole Project

This feeling of uneasiness is surely bound to be transformed into the conviction that the whole project of securing for consciousness through cognition what exists in itself is absurd, and that there is a boundary between cognition and the Absolute which completely separates them.

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Phenomenology of Spirit

If ‘being’ is above all difference and commencement, Being is itself repetition, the recommencement of being. Repetition is the ‘provided’ of the condition which authenticates the imperatives of Being. This is the constant ambiguity of the notion of origin and the reason for our earlier deception: origins are assigned only in a world which challenges the original as much as the copy, and an origins assigns a ground only in a world already precipitated into universal ungrounding.

Gilles Deleuze, Difference and Repetition

“To philosophize means to exist from ground. Philosophy is neither one science among others nor a production of world-views; it is more primordial than every science and, at the same time, more primordial than every world-view. The important thing is that we do it proper justice, that is, in philosophizing, we always transform each and every thing in ourselves and to ourselves. As long as we waiver back and forth on the surface by doubling theoretical and practical maxims, we are not yet in philosophy. Logic and metaphysics are grounded in the understanding-of-being that is determined by the ontological difference. The latter seems to us abstract, dry, and vacuous, and yet we must ask: What is the understanding-of-being?  The freedom toward ground is the outstripping, in the upswing, of that which carries us away and gives us distance.  The human being is a creature of distance! And only by way of the real primordial distance that the human in his transcendence establishes toward all beings does the true nearness to things begin to grow in him. And only the capacity to hear into the distance summons forth the awakening of the answer of those humans who should be near.”

— Martin Heidegger, The Metaphysical Foundations of Logic

To grasp the riddle is to leap, especially when the riddle involves being as a whole. Here there is no particular being or assortment of beings from which the whole could ever be disclosed. To make surmises on this riddle we must venture a journey into the open region of what in general is concealed, into that untraveled and uncharted region which is unconcealment (aletheia) of what is most concealed. We must venture into truth.

Martin Heidegger, Nietzsche II

“ Now, surely, Thrasymachus, the crafts rule over and are stronger than the things of which they are the crafts?  Very reluctantly, he conceded this as well.  No kind of knowledge seeks or orders what is advantageous to itself, then, but what is advantageous to the weaker, which is subject to it.  He tried to fight this conclusion, but he conceded it in the end. And after he had, I said: Surely, then, no doctor, insofar as he is a doctor, seeks or orders what is advantageous to himself, but what is advantageous to his patient? We agreed that a doctor in the precise sense is a ruler of bodies, not a money-maker. Wasn’t that agreed?  Yes.  So a ship’s captain in the precise sense is a ruler of sailors, not a sailor?  That’s what we agreed.  Doesn’t it follow that a ship’s captain or ruler won’t seek and order what is advantageous to himself, but what is advantageous to a sailor, his subject?  He reluctantly agreed.  So, then, Thrasymachus, no one in any position of rule, insofar as he is a ruler, seeks or orders what is advantageous to himself, but what is advantageous to his subject, that on which he practices his craft. It is to his subject and what is advantageous and proper to it that he looks, and everything he says and does he says and does for it.”

— Plato, Republic, Book I, 342c-e

“ἔστι γὰρ τοῦτο τέχνη μὲν οὐκ ὂν παρὰ σοὶ περὶ Ὁμήρου εὖ λέγειν, ὃ νυνδὴ ἔλεγον, θεία δὲ δύναμις ἥ σε κινεῖ, ὥσπερ ἐν τῇ λίθῳ ἣν Εὐριπίδης μὲν Μαγνῆτιν ὠνόμασεν, οἱ δὲ πολλοὶ Ἡρακλείαν. καὶ γὰρ αὕτη ἡ λίθος οὐ μόνον αὐτοὺς τοὺς δακτυλίους ἄγει τοὺς σιδηροῦς, ἀλλὰ καὶ δύναμιν ἐντίθησι τοῖς δακτυλίοις ὥστ᾽ αὖ δύνασθαι ταὐτὸν τοῦτο ποιεῖν ὅπερ ἡ λίθος, ἄλλους ἄγειν δακτυλίους, ὥστ᾽ ἐνίοτε ὁρμαθὸς μακρὸς πάνυ σιδηρίων καὶ δακτυλίων ἐξ ἀλλήλων ἤρτηται: πᾶσι δὲ τούτοις ἐξ ἐκείνης τῆς λίθου ἡ δύναμις ἀνήρτηται. οὕτω δὲ καὶ ἡ Μοῦσα ἐνθέους μὲν ποιεῖ αὐτή, διὰ δὲ τῶν ἐνθέων τούτων ἄλλων ἐνθουσιαζόντων ὁρμαθὸς ἐξαρτᾶται.”

—

Plato, Ion

For, as I was saying just now, this is not an art in you, whereby you speak well on Homer, but a divine power, which moves you like that in the stone which Euripides named a magnet, but most people call “Heraclea stone.” For this stone not only attracts iron rings, but also imparts to them a power whereby they in turn are able to do the very same thing as the stone, and attract other rings; so that sometimes there is formed quite a long chain of bits of iron and rings, suspended one from another; and they all depend for this power on that one stone. In the same manner also the Muse inspires men herself, and then by means of these inspired persons the inspiration spreads to others, and holds them in a connected chain.