becoming post-Heideggerian

---

The prevailing sequence in Contributions to Philosophy: from enowning— “echo, playing forward, leap, grounding, ones to come, last god”—is cyclic of being-historical thinking, whereby “Art is history in the essential sense that it grounds history” (end of “Origin of the Work of Art”) generatively. Evolvability is understood by Heidegger as the generative cyclicity of that series.  

Many years ago, I extrapolated from that thinking and relative to a long letter to Richard Capobianco where I had Contributions in mind,
“a Heideggerian individuation.” (He wasn’t later emailed about that.)  

More simply, the Contributions series can be troped relative to “originary flow…” as cyclic ethos-motivated poiesis, poiesis-motivated transformation of logos, and logos-relative transformation (or contributions to transformation) of ethos.  

a note about prospective interest

---

I can be analytical about any conceptual exploration, e.g., in the manner of a discourse on implicature. But analysis always presumes a scale of relevance, especially when one wants to be practical. In particular, what’s accessible to linguistic analysis may axiomatically conceal phenomenological relevance that is ordinary to psychoanalysis.

empathing toward Andromeda

---

Imagine a clear, starry night (probably outside of urban light pollution). The stars are randomly scattered.

But you can see areas of the sky whose stars you regard as a group, and thereby they “belong” together, and are called a constellation.

One oddly-bordered set of stars was called the “Andromeda” constellation by classical Greeks. Why such a jagged grouping?

Someone with lasting influence “saw” the goddess Andromeda spread-
ing her arms across that area of the heavens (here depicted at 90ª rotation). In honor of—in remembrance of, in validation of incompar-
able beauty—the “presence” of the goddess is certified by those stars which belong together, by god, in her name.

OneSelf is not basically a matter of “subjectivity”

---

‘Subjectivity’ is a politically-loaded term—coined in early modernity (from Latin)—which originally pertained to the condition of a person as subject to a lord.

The Greek notion of psyche was something else: a conception of Self (which I discussed briefly, a while ago) or soul. I refer to selfality, self (and selfidentity), self/[inter]personal difference, nebulous Self, and altogether a differentiated conception of oneSelf. Homogenous notions of subjectivity are relatively simplistic (as well as ideologically tinged).

loving mental playces

---

places of play <—> play of places—mental and / or otherwise.

• playing place: Suppose...
• interplacing: We suppose...
• interplaying: We consider...
• playtiming: “Can you come out and play?”
• playing time: In the beginning,…
• interplayce: We loved that…
• playgrounding: It is the case that...
• interplaycing: Are you wholly in play here?

Free association—reverie, “daydreaming”—has integral value for creativity inasmuch as it serves the mental efficacy which is ordinarily necessary for adaptability, for gaining options to prefer, and for shaping purposes, all of which can be individuative through self-reflective learning: advancing flexibility, enhancing scale of value, and inspiring aspiration.

That efficacy released into novel play evinces options, values, directions, etc. which can be importantly novel: creative.