In-der-Blog-sein

Joseph Soleary has a long interpretation of Marion contra Heidegger as part of a longer discussion on the Gift as fundamental existential that relates us to God.

According to Marion, Heidegger sensed the primacy of givenness in his talk of “Es gibt Sein” – “being is given”, but he masked it again in identifying the “it” that “gives” being with the Ereignis, an interpretament not born from staying with the phenomenon. Marion saves, finally, Husserl and Heidegger from themselves by seeking “to recognize givenness as such” and that “the phenomenon in the mode of object or entity can appear only in finding itself already and more originally given; objecthood and entityness could thus be thought of as mere variations, legitimate but limited, very exactly as horizons, which are drawn by and on the background of givenness”. Beings are given by being, let us say. But the beings must be de-entified so that their real nature as givenness comes to life, and being itself must be desubstantialized to become pure giving. As for the destinee of this gift, the thinker or thanker, he too is no longer an object, an entity, or even a subject.

“Givenness can never appear except indirectly, in the fold (pli) of the given”, and Marion seeks “to make appear a phenomenon purely and strictly given, without remainder, and owing all its phenomenality to givenness”. An object or an entity totally transmuted into gift can alone light up givenness in its essential character.

Interestingly, interpretament is a synonym for interpretation. I looked it up.  ¶ 8:26 AM