Sunday, February 06, 2011
The aroundness of our world.
These phenomena—nearness, distance, direction—give the first basic structure of the aroundness. If we take these phenomena in their unity and uniformity, we can say that the aroundness in the world is the regional nearness and distance of the intimate with-which of concern. That with which I dwell in everyday concern is defined by the near and far, specifically by regional, oriented, directed nearness and distance. But both structural moments—region, near and far—imply being oriented to the concerned Dasein itself. Near and far as well as region have this characteristic reference back to concerned preoccupation. Only with this back reference seen from the vantage of environmental things. with this orientation of the near and far and of what is defined in the character of the region, is the full structure of the ‘around’ of aroundness secured.

P. 226
So distance concerns intimacy, how close or distant from you is a cousin or lover, whereas nearness is regional, as in Delaware is near Columbus.
What might he say of the most recent statistical assertion that our cosmos is 250 times greater than what we have so far seen via Hubbel? And that it is flat and infinite?

I say, "Whew." But still aroundness.
I guess we need to take deep field images of the entire night sky, and then we'll see more of what's visible, since photons first began to travel freely. But I don't understand how the universe can be infinite. Perhaps that is different understandings of the mathematical. I suppose there might be an infinite number of universes, although I've also heard that according to string theory there are merely 10^500 universes.

My world is around me. What goes on in locations too distant to affect me isn't part of my world.
Post a Comment

<< Home
For when Ereignis is not sufficient.

Appropriation appropriates! Send your appropriations to enowning at gmail.com.

View mobile version