Thinking of Being in the Perspective of Finitude

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 서울대학교 철학사상연구소
· 수록지 정보 : 철학사상 / 35호 / 259 ~ 325페이지
· 저자명 : 박현정

초록

In Chapter 1: “Consciousness and Infinity,” I will give a simple elucidation of the way in which traditional metaphysics deals with infinity and finiteness. The traditional concept of metaphysics as the self-consciousness of consciousness recognizes its own finiteness and supposes beyond all the finites “infinity,” which means totality with eternity. With the supposition of “infinity” which only the absolute consciousness, reason, can recognize, human concrete existence, which is bound to its singularity, is denounced as the ‘finite’ once again. And therefore, we come to suffer the dichotomy which requires the endeavor of a reconciliation between the opposites in vain. In Chapter 2: “Hegel and the Last Solution of Traditional Metaphysics,” I will examine the Hegelian speculative logic which is evaluated to have succeeded in the reconciliation of finiteness and infinity. He has rejected to admit the powerlessness of consciousness which is found in the spurious infinity of traditional metaphysics, and he removed the margin between us and ab-solute being. He made being move within a finite consciousness to the end, which gives totality to this movement. In this chapter, I will make clear that the reconciliation which traditional metaphysics has pursued has gained its fruit by the self-realization of consciousness as power to posit an order which can encompass being in a total system. In Chapter 3: “Heidegger and Co-belongingness of Thinking and Being,” I will clarify what traditional metaphysics did not consider, that is, Being itself that is not regulated by consciousness and the genuine ‘co-belongingness’ between Being and Thinking. From this co-belongingness, our being becomes open-ended and we take the responsibility of the accomplishment of our own being. Here, it will be revealed that the concepts of finiteness and infinity should be abandoned, from the request of Being itself which is in union with Thinking, and therefore always in “finitude.” In Chapter 4: “Derrida vs. Heidegger, on the Occurrence with Nothingness,” I will advance to the elucidation of Being itself, how it enables the finitude of our understanding, and which task the co-belongingness of Being and Thinking demands us to accomplish. It is urgently necessary for us to think anew the ‘Occurrence (Ereignis)’ more precisely, the simultaneous ‘annihilation (Vernichtung)’ of Being itself. By clarifying the meaning of the self-withdrawal of Being, or annihilation, we would reappraise the unexhausted possibility of the late Heidegger’s thought, which the so-called Post-modernists could have not drawn. I will focus here especially upon Derrida, who observes the ‘Differance’, which is structural infinity based on the ‘otherness’ or ‘difference’ of origin, against Hegel’s ‘identical’ monistic thought. It is intended to mean the annihilation of Being, but actually means for Derrida the mere substitutions of presence by consciousness which is forgetful of Being itself. Along the way, I will show the reason for the forgetfulness of Being by consciousness and ask whether or not this is human beings’ destiny. I will deal with the topic of language, not only because it was a main concern for Derrida and late Heidegger, but also because it is within language that the co-belongingness of Being and Thinking and thus “finitude” itself becomes most drastically problematic. In Chapters 3 and 4, I aim to explicate, on the one hand, the difference between the thought of Hegel and that of early Heidegger, and on the other, the anti-metaphysical characteristic of the thought of late Heidegger, by elucidating why Heidegger could not help but naming ‘Being itself.’ Ultimately, in characterizing the relationship between Being and Thinking as a finitude which overcomes the dichotomy between infinity and finiteness, I want to understand human beings’ genuine facticity and affirm it as it is.

참고자료

· 없음