Heidegger What Is Called Thinking

MARTIN
HEIDEGGER
WHA1j
8
CALLEDTHINKING?
TRANS LATED BY
J. GLENN GRAY
WHAT
WHAT IS CALLED THINKING?
ISCALLED THINKING?
RELIGIOUS PERSPECTIVES
Planned and
Planned and Edited
Edited by
by
RUTH NANDA
NANDA ANSHEN
ANSHEN
BOARD OF EDITORS
BOARD OF EDITORS
H. Auden
W. H. Auden
Karl Barth
Karl Barth
Martin C.
Martin D'Arcy, SJ.
C. D'Arcy, S.].
Christopher Dawson
Christopher Dawson
C.
C. Dodd
H. Dodd
Mircea Eliade
Mircea Eliade
Muhammad Zafrulla
Zafrulla Khan
John Macquarrie
John Macquarrie
jacques Maritain
Jacques Maritain
]ames Muilenburg
James Muilenburg
Sarvepalli
Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan
Alexander Sachs
Sachs
Gershom Scholem
WHAT IS CALLED
THINKING?
by MARTIN
by MAR TIN HEIDEGGER
A Translation of Was Heisst

Translation of Heisst Denkeri?
Denken1
by
by
J. Glenn Gray
Fred D. Wieck and J. Gray
With an Introduction by
by]. Gray
/. Glenn Gray
tfj
1817
HARPER & ROW, PUBLISHERS
NEW YORK,
NEW EVANSTON, AND LONDON
YORK, EVANSTON,
Originally
Originally published
published by
by Max Niemeyer Verlag, Tuebingen
Nlemeyer Verlag, Tuebingen under the title
title
Was Heisst
Hetsst Denken1,
Denkenf, copyright by Max Niemeyer
copyright 1954 by Niemeyer Verlag,
Verlag, Tuebingen.
Tuebingen.
English
English translation by J. Glenn Gray.
by Fred D. Wieck and J. Gray.
WHAT IS
WHAT CAT.LED THINKING? Copyright
is CAllED Copyright @ 1968 in the English
in the English translation by
translation by
Harper fr Row, Publishers,
Harper r/:r Publishers, Incorporated. in the
Incorporated. Printed in the United States
States of
of
America. All rights
rights reserved.
reserved. No part
part of this book may
of this may be used or
or reproduced
reproduced
in any
any manner whatsoever without written permission
permission except
except in
in the
the case
case of
of
brief
brief quotations
quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews.
critical articles reviews. For information
information
address Harper
address Harper r/:r Row,
& Row, Publishers,
Publishers, Incorporated, East 33rd
19 East
Incorporated, 49 Street, New
J3rd Street,
York,
York, N.Y. 10016
fiMTION
FIRST EDITION
FlltST
I.llmAllY CONGIIESS CATALOG CARD

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CAJtD NUMBER: 68-17591
NUMBD.: 68-17591
E-S
MARTIN
MARTIN HEIDEGGER
HEIDEGGER
WORKS
WORKS
General Editor J.
J. Glenn Gray
Gray
Colorado College
College
Also by Heidegger
by Martin Heidegger
BEING ANI> TIME
BEING AND TIME
DISCOURSE ON THINKING
DISCOURSE ON THINKING
(Gelassenheit)
(Gelassenheit)
VOLUMES ALREADY
VOLUMES ALREADY PUBLISHED
PUBLISHED
I.
L The Historic
Historic Reality
Reality of
of Christian
Christian Culture
Culture
by Christopher
by Christopher Dawson
Dawson
II.
II. International Conflict
International Conflict in
in the
the Twentieth
Twentieth Century
Century
by Herbert Butterfield
by Butterfield
III.
III. Limits of
The Limits of Reason
Reason
by George
by George Boas
IV.
IV. Nihilism
Nihilism
by Helmut Thielicke
by Thielicke
V.
V. The Way of Israel
Way of Israel
by James
by James Mullenburg
Muilenburg
VI.
VI. No Absent God
by Martin C.
by D'Arcy, SS.J.
C. D'Arcy, J.
VII.
VII. Islam: Its
Islam: Its
Meaning for Modern Man
Meaning for
by Muhammad Zafrulla Khan
by
VIII.
VIII. Matter and Spirit
Spirit
by
by R. C. Zaehner
IX. Morality
Morality and Beyond
Beyond
by
by Paul Tillich
X. God Here and Now
by
by Karl Barth
Earth
XI. Unity
Unity in
in Freedom
by
by Augustin
Augustin Cardinal Bea
XII.
XII. The
The Heart
Heart of Man
of Man
by
by Erich Fromm
XIII.
XIII. Heroes
Heroes and
and Gods
Gods
by
by Moses
Moses Hadas
Hadas and Morton Smith
vii
vii
XIV.
XIV. The Christian
The Christian Intellectual
by Jaroslav
by Jaroslav Pelikan
XV.
XV. Symbols
Symbols in
in Zoroastrianism
Zoraastrianism
by Jacques
by Jacques Duchesne-Guillem.in
Duchesne-Guillemin
XVI. Liturgy and Art
Liturgy and
by H. A. Reinhold
by
XVII. The Symbolism
The Symbolism of
of Evil
by Paul Ricoeur
by
XVIII. Philosophical
Philosophical Faith and Revelation
by Karl Jaspers
by Jaspers
XIX. Vatican Council II The New Direction
by Oscar Cullmann
by
XX.
XX. End God
In The End
by John
by X. Robinson
John A. T.
XXI. What Is Called Thinking?
Thinking?
by Martin Heidegger
Heidegger
viii
Vlll
CONTENTS
Religious Perspectives
Religious Perspectives
Its
Its Meaning and Purpose,
Meaning Purpose, RUTH NANDA ANSHEN . . . xi
Introduction,
Introduction, J.
j. GLENN GRAY . xvii
xvii
PART ONE
LECTURE II
LECTURE 3
LECTURE II
LECTURE 19
LECTURE III
LECTURE 28
LECTURE IV
LECTURE ?,7
37
LECTURE
LECTURE vV 48
48
LECTURE VI
LECTURE 57
LECTURE VII
LECTURE 74
LECTURE VIII
LECTURE 82
LECTURE IX.
LECTURE IX 88
LECTURE XX
LECTURE 100
TWO
PART TWO
PART
LECTURE II
LECTURE 113
113
LECTURE II
LECTURE II 126
126
ix
ix
CONTENTS
CONTENTS
LECTURE III
LECTURE III 138
138
LECTURE IV
LECTURE 148
148
LECTURE
LECTURE vV 163
163
LECTURE VI .
LECTURE 172
172
LECTURE VII
LECTURE 182
182
LECTURE VIII
LECTURE 194
194
LECTURE IX.
LECTURE IX 208
208
LECTURE XX
LECTURE 216
216
LECTURE XI.
LECTURE XI 229
229
X
Its
Its Meaning and
Meaning and Purpose
Purpose
REUGious PERSPECTIVES represents

RELIGIOUS represents aa quest
quest for
for the
the rediscovery
rediscovery
of man. It
of It constitutes
constitutes an effort
effort to
to define
define man's
man's search
search for
for the
the
essence of
essence of being
being in
in order
order that
that he may
may have a knowledge
knowledge of goals.
of goals.
It is
It is an endeavor to to show that
that there
there is
is no possibility
possibility of
of achieving
achieving
an understanding
understanding of of man's total
total nature
nature on the
the basis
basis of
of phenom
phenom-
ena known by by the analytical method alone.
the analytical alone. It
It hopes
hopes to
to point
point to
the false
the false antinomy
antinomy between revelation
revelation and reason, faith and
reason, faith
knowledge, grace
knowledge, grace and nature,
nature, courage anxiety. Mathematics,
courage and anxiety.
physics, philosophy, biology,
physics, philosophy, biology, and religion,
religion, in spite
spite of their
their almost
complete
complete independence,
independence, have begun begun toto sense
sense their interrelated-
interrelated-
ness
ness and to to become aware of that that mode of cognition
cognition which
teaches
teaches that
that "the light is not without but within me, and I
light is I myself
myself
am the
the light."
light."
Modern man is is threatened by by a world created by by himself. He
is
is faced
faced with the the conversion of mind to to naturalism,
naturalism, a dogmatic
dogmatic
secularism
secularism and an opposition
opposition to belief in the transcendent. He
to a belief
begins
begins toto see,
see, however,
however, that
that the universe is is given
given not as one exist-
exist
ing
ing and one perceived
perceived but as as the unity
unity of subject
subject and object;
object; that
the
the barrier
barrier between them cannot be said to have been dissolved
as
as the
the result
result ofof recent experience
experience in the physical
physical sciences,
stiences> since
this
this barrier
barrier hashas never existed.
existed. Confronted
Confronted with the question
question of
meaning,
meaning, he is is summoned
summoned to to rediscover
rediscover and scrutinize the imim
mutable and and the
the permanent
permanent which constitute the the dynamic,
dynamic, unify-
unify
ing
ing aspect
aspect of of life
life as
as well
well asas the
the principle
principle of differentiation;
differentiation; to
reconcile
reconcile identity
identity and and diversity,
diversity, immutability
immutability and and unrest. He He
begins
begins to to recognize
recognize thatthat just
just asas every
every person
person descends by by his
his
particular
particular path,
path, soso he is able
he is able toto ascend,
ascend, and this
this ascent aims at at
xi
xi
xii
Xli RELIGIOUS PERSPECTIVES
aa return
return to
to the
the source
source of
of creation,
creation, an inwardhome
aninward home from whichhe
from which he
become estranged,
has become
has estranged.
It isis the
the hope
hope of
of RELIGIOUS
REuGxous PERSPECTIVES
PERSPEcrrvES that
that the
the rediscovery
rediscovery of of
It
man will point the
man will the way to
to the
the rediscovery of
rediscovery
way
To
of God.
God. To thisthis end
end aa
point
rediscovery of first principles
should constitute
rediscovery of first principles should constitute part
part of
of the
the quest.
quest.
These principles, not
These not to be superseded bynew
to be discoveries, are not
new discoveries,
superseded by
are not
principles,
those of
those of historical
historical worlds
worlds that that come
come to to bebe and
and perish.
perish. They
They are are to
to
be sought
be sought in in the
the heart
bean and and spirit
spirit ofof man,
man, and and nono interpretation
interpretation
of aa merely
of merely historical
historical or or scientific
scientific universe
universe can can guide
guide the the search.
search.
RELIGIOUS PERSPECTIVES attempts attempts not not only
only to to ask
ask dispassionately
dispassionately
what the
what the nature
nature of God is,
of God is, but
but also
also to to restore
restore to to human
human life life at
at
least the
least the hypothesis
hypothesis of of GodGod and and the
the symbols
symbols that that relate
relate to to him.
him.
It endeavors
It endeavors to show that
to show that man is is faced
faced with with thethe metaphysical
metaphysical
question of the truth of religion while
question of the truth of religion
while he he encounters
encounters the the empiri
empiri-
cal question of
cal question
of its
its effects
effects on the the life
life of humanity and its
of humanity its meaning
meaning
for society.
for society. Religion
Religion is is here
here distinguished
distinguished from theology theology and its its
doctrinal
doctrinal formsforms and and is intended to
is intended to denote the feelings, feelings, aspira
aspira-
tions, and acts of men, as they relate to total
tions, and acts of men, as they relate to
reality. For we are all
total reality. all
in
in search
search of of reality,
reality, of
of a reality
reality which is there whether we know it
is there it
or
or not;
not; and the the search
search is is of
of our own making making but reality reality is is not.
not.
RELIGIOUS
PERSPECTIVES is is nourished by by the spiritual and in-
the spiritual in
tellectual
tellectual energy
energy of of world
world thought,
thought, by religious and ethical
by those religious ethical
leaders
leaders who are are notnot merely
merely spectators
spectators but scholars deeply deeply inin
volved in
volved in the
the critical
critical problems
problems common to to all
all religions.
religions. These
thinkers
thinkers recognize
recognize that that human morality morality and human ideals ideals thrive
thrive
only when
only when set set inin aa context
context of of aa transcendent attitude toward
religion and that by pointing to the ground of
religion and that by pointing to the ground
of identity
identity and the the
common
common nature nature of of being
being in in the
the religious
religious experience
experience of of man,
man, the the
essential
essential nature
nature of of religion
religion may may be be defined.
defined. Thus,Thus, theythey are com
are com-
mitted
mitted to to reevaluate
reevaluate the the meaning
meaning of of everlastingness,
everlastingness, an an experi-
experi
ence which has been lost
ence which has been lost and which and which is
is the
the content
content of
of that
that visio
visio
Dei
Dei constituting
constituting the the structure
structure of of all
all religions.
religions. It It is
is the
the many
many ab- ab
sorbed
sorbed everlastingly
everlastingly into into the the ultimate
ultimate unity, unity, aa unity
unity subsuming
subsuming
what Whitehead calls
what Whitehead calls the fluency the fluency of
of God
God and
and the
the everlastingness
everlastingness
of passing experience.
of passing experience.
These
These volumes
volumes seek seek to to show
show thatthat thethe unity
unity ofof which
which we we speak
speak
consists
consists in
in aa certitude
certitude emanating
emanating from
from the
the nature
nature of
of man
man who
who
seeks
seeks God
God and and thethe nature
nature of of God
God who who seeksseeks man.
man. SuchSuch certitude
certitude
RELIGIOUS PERSPECTIVES xiii
XIH
bathes in
bathes in an
an Intuitive
intuitive act
act of
of cognition,
cognition, participating
participating in
in the
the divine
divine
essence and
essence and is
is related
related to
to the
the natural
natural spirituality
spirituality of
of intelligence.
intelligence.
This is
This is not
not by
by any
any means
means to
to say
say that
that there
there is
is an
an equivalence
equivalence of
of all
all
faiths in
faiths in the
the traditional
traditional religions
religions of
of human
human history.
history. It
It is,
is, however,
however,
to emphasize
to emphasize thethe distinction
distinction between
between the
the spiritual
spiritual and
and thethe tem
tem-
poral which
poral which all religions acknowledge.
all religions acknowledge. For For duration
duration of of thought
thought
is composed
is composed of of instants
instants superior
superior to to time,
time, and
and is is an
an intuition
intuition ofof
the permanence
the permanence of of existence
existence and and itsits metahistorical
metahistorical reality.
reality. In
In
fact, the
fact, the symbol
symbol1 itself
1 itself found on cover cover andand jacket
jacket ofof each
each volume
volume
of RELIGIOUS
of REUGrous PERSPECTIVES is is the
the visible
visible sign
sign oror representation
representation of
the essence,
the essence, immediacy,
immediacy, and timelessness
timelessness of of religious
religious experience;
experience;
the one
the one immutable center, center, which may may be be analogically
analogically related
related to
to
being in
being in pure
pure act,
act, moving
moving with
with centrifugal
centrifugal and ecumenical
ecumenical neces
neces-
sity outward into the manifold modes, yet simultaneously, with
sity outward into the manifold modes, yet simultaneously,
dynamic centripetal
dynamic centripetal powerpower and with with full
full intentional
intentional energy,
energy, re
re-
turning to
turning to the
the source.
source. Through
Through the the very
very diversity
diversity of its its authors*
authors,
the Series
the Series shows that that the
the basic
basic and poignant
poignant concern of of every
every
faith
faith isis to
to point
point to,to, and overcome the the crisis
crisis inin our apocalyptic
apocalyptic
epoch-the
epoch crisis of
the crisis separation from man and of man's
of man's separation
separation
separation from God-the God the failure
failure of love. The authors endeavor,
of love. endeavor,
moreover,
moreover, to to illustrate
illustrate thethe truth that the the human heart is able, and
is able,
even
even yearns,
yearns, to to go
go to to the very
very lengths
lengths of of God; that the the darkness
darkness
and cold,
cold, thethe frozen
frozen spiritual
spiritual misery
misery of of recent
recent times are are breaking,
breaking,
cracking, and beginning
cracking, beginning to to move,
move, yielding
yielding to to efforts
efforts to overcome
spiritual
spiritual
muteness and moral paralysis. paralysis. In this way,
this way, it it is
is hoped,
hoped,
the
the immediacy
immediacy of of pain
pain and sorrow,
sorrow, the primacy
primacy of tragedy
tragedy and
suffering
suffering in in human life, life, may
may be transmuted into a spiritual spiritual and
moral
moral triumph.
triumph. For the the uniqueness
uniqueness of man lies lies in his
his capacity
capacity for
for
self-transcendence.
self-transcendence.
RELIGious PERSPECTIVES is
RELIGIOUS PERSPECTIVES is therefore
therefore an effort effort to explore
explore the
meaning
meaning of of God,
God, an an exploration
exploration which constitutes
constitutes an aspectaspect of
of
man's
man's intrinsic
intrinsic nature,
nature, part
part of of his
his ontological
ontological substance. This
Series
Series grows
grows out out ofof an
an abiding
abiding concern
concern that in spite spite of the release
of
of man's
man's creative
creative energy
energy which
which science
science has in in part
part accomplished,
accomplished,
this
this very
very science
science has has overturned
overturned the the essential
essential order of nature. nature.
Shrewd
Shrewd as as man's
man's calculations
calculations have have become concerning
concerning his means,
his
his choice
choice of of ends
ends which
which waswas formerly
formerly correlated with belief in
11 From
From the
the original
original design by Leo
design by Leo Katz.
Katz.
xiv
XIV PERSPECTIVES
RELIGIOUS
God.
God* with absolute
absolute criteria
criteria of of conduct,
conduct, has has become witless. witless. God
is
is not toto be treated
treated as as an exception
exception to to metaphysical
metaphysical principles,
principles,
invoked to to prevent
prevent their collapse. He is
their collapse. is rather
rather theirtheir chief
chief exem
exem-
plification, the
plification, the sources
sources ofof all potentiality. The personal
all potentiality. personal reality
reality of of
freedom and providence,
providence, of of will conscience, may
will and conscience, may demonstrate
that "he who knows" commands aa depth depth of of consciousness
consciousness inac inac-
cessible to
cessible to the profane
profane man,
man, and is is capable
capable of of that
that transfiguration
transfiguration
which prevents
prevents the twisting of
the twisting of all good to
all good to ignominy.
ignominy. This reli reli-
gious
gious content
content of of experience
experience is is not within
within thethe province
province of of science
science
to bestow;
bestow; it it corrects
corrects thethe error
error of treating the
of treating the scientific
scientific account
account
as
as if
if it
it were itself
itself metaphysical
metaphysical or religious;religious; it it challenges
challenges the
tendency
tendency to to make a religion
religion of of science-or
science or a a science
science of religion-
of religion
aa dogmatic
dogmatic act act which destroys
destroys the dynamic of
the moral dynamic of man. Indeed,
Indeed,
many
many men of of science
science areare confronted with unexpected unexpected implica implica-
tions of their
tions their own thought thought and are are beginning
beginning to to accept,
accept, for for
instance,
instance, thethe trans-spatial
trans-spatial and trans-temporal
trans-temporal dimension in in the
the
nature of of reality.
reality.
RELIGIOUS PERSPECTIVEs
R.Eu:GIOUS PERSPECTIVES attempts
attempts to to show thethe fallacy
fallacy of of the
the ap
ap-
parent
parent irrelevance
irrelevance of of God in in history.
history. This seriesseries submits
submits that that no
convincing
convincing image image of man can arise, arise, in in spite
spite of
of thethe many
many ways ways in in
which human thought thought has tried tried to reach it, it, without aa philosophy
philosophy
of human nature and human freedom which does not exclude exclude
God. This image image of Homo cum Deo implies implies the the highest
highest con con-
ceivable freedom,
freedom, the the freedom to step into
to step into the
the very
very fabric
fabric of of the
the
universe,
universe, a new formula for for man's collaboration
collaboration with the the creative
creative
process
process and the only only one which is able to
is able protect man from the
to protect the
terror of existence. This image image implies further that
implies further that thethe mind and
conscience are capable capable of of making genuine discriminations
making genuine discriminations and
thereby
thereby may reconcile the serious tensions between the
serious tensions the secular
secular
and religious,
religious, the profane
profane and sacred.
sacred. The idea idea of of the
the sacred
sacred lies
lies
in what it it is, timeless existence.
is, timeless existence. By By emphasizing
emphasizing timeless
timeless exist exist-
ence against
against reason as as a reality,
reality, we are are liberated,
liberated, in in our com com-
munion with the eternal, eternal, from the otherwise
otherwise unbreakable
unbreakable rule rule ofof
"before and after." after." Then we are able able to to admit that that allall forms,
forms, allall
symbols
symbols in religions,
religions, by by their
their negation
negation of of error
error and their their affirma
affirma-
tion of the actuality
actuality of truth,
truth, make it it possible
possible to to experience
experience that that
knowing
knowing which is is above knowledge,
knowledge, and that that dynamic
dynamic passagepassage of of
the universe to to unending
unending unity.
unity.
God is is here interpreted not as
interpreted as a a heteronomous being being issuing
issuing
RELIGIOUS PERSPECTIVES XV
XV
commandments but
commandments but asas the Tatt-Twam-Asi: "Do
the Tatt-Twam-Asi: "Do unto
unto others
others as as
you would
you would have
have others
others do do unto
unto you.
you. ForFor II am am thethe Lord/*
Lord." ThisThis
does not
does not mean
mean aa commandment
commandment from from on on high
high but but rather
rather aa self-
self-
realization through "the
realization through "the other";
other"; since
since thethe isolated
isolated individual
individual is is
unthinkable and
unthinkable meaningless. Man
and meaningless. becomes man
Man becomes man by by recognizing
recognizing
his true nature
his true nature as as aa creature
creature capable
capable of of will
will and and decision.
decision. For For
then the
then the divine
divine and the the sacred
sacred become manifest. And
become manifest. And though
though he he
believes in
believes in choices,
choices, he is is no Utopian
Utopian expecting
expecting the the "coming
"coming of of
the kingdom/*
the kingdom." Man, Man, individually
individually and and collectively,
collectively, is is losing
losing thethe
chains which have
chains have bound him to to the
the inexorable
inexorable demandsdemands of of
nature. The constraints
nature. constraints are are diminishing
diminishing and and an an infinity
infinity of of choices
choices
becomes available
available to to him. Thus man himself, himself, from the the sources
sources
of his
of his ontological
ontological being,
being, at at last
last must
must decide
decide what is the bonum
is the
et malum. And though
et though the the anonymous
anonymous forces forces which in in the
the past
past
have set
have set the
the constraints
constraints do indeedindeed threaten
threaten him with total total anar
anar-
chy and with perhaps
chy perhaps aa worse tyrannytyranny than he he experienced
experienced in
past history, he nevertheless begins to
past history, he nevertheless begins
to see
see that
that preceding
preceding the
moral issue
moral issue isis the
the cognitive
cognitive problem:
problem: the the perception
perception of those
conditions
conditions forfor life permit mankind to
life which permit to fulfill
fulfill itself
itself and to
accept the truth
accept the truth that beyond scientific,
that beyond discursive knowledge
scientific, discursive knowledge is is
nondiscursive,
nondiscursive, intuitive
intuitive awareness. And, I I suggest,
suggest, thisthis is is not to to
secularize
secularize God but rather to gather him into the heart of
to gather of the
the
nature of
nature of matter and indeed of of life itself.
life itself.
The volumes in this Series

in this Series seek
seek to to challenge
challenge the crisis crisis which
separates,
separates,
to
to make reasonable
reasonable a religion
religion that binds,binds, and to present
present
the
the numinous reality experience of man. Insofar as the
reality within the experience
Series
Series succeeds
succeeds in in this
this quest,
quest, it will direct mankind toward a
it will a
reality that is eternal and
reality that is eternal
and away
away from a preoccupation
preoccupation with that that
which isis illusory
illusory and ephemeral.
ephemeral.
For
For man is
is now confronted with hishis burden and his greatness: greatness:
"He calleth
calleth toto me,
me, Watchman,
Watchman, what of of the night?
night? Watchman,
what
what ofof the
the night?"2
night?" Perhaps
2
Perhaps the anguish
anguish in the human soul may
be
be assuaged
assuaged by by the
the answer,
answer, by the assimilation
by the assimilation of the person person in in
God:
God: "The
"The morning
morning cometh,cometh, andand also
also the night:
night: if if ye
ye will inin
quire, inquire ye: return, come." 3
quire, inquire ye: return,
RUTH NANDA ANSHEN
RUTH NANDA ANSHEN
Isaiah 21:11.
22 Isaiah 21:11.
Isaiah 21:12.
83 Isaiah 21: 12.
INTRODUCTION
by].
by J. Glenn Gray
Gray
What Is Is Called Thinking?

Thinking? is is a course
course ofof university
university lectures.
lectures.
Martin Heidegger
Heidegger delivered these lectures lectures toto Ms
his students
during
during thethe winter and summer semesters
semesters of of 1951 and 11952 952
at the University
at the University of Freiburg.
Freiburg. They
They were the last before Ms
the last his
formal retirement from the university. They were also
university. They also the
first
first lectures
lectures he was permitted
permitted to to give
give there
there since
since 1944,
1944,
when he was drafted by by the Nazis into
into the people's
people's militia
(Volkssturm)
(Folkssturrn) and was afterwards forbidden to to teach by by
the French occupying
occupying powers.
powers.
What this
this long
long interruption
interruption in his his teaching activity must
teaching activity
have cost
cost him isis not difficult
difficult to guess, for Heidegger
to guess, Heidegger is is above
all else
all else a teacher.
teacher. It
It is
is no accident that nearly
nearly allall his
his publi
publi-
cations since Being
cations since Being and Time (1927) (1927) were first first lectures
lectures or
seminar discussions.
discussions. For him the spoken spoken word is is greatly
greatly
superior it was for Plato. In this book he
superior to to the written,
written, asas it
names Socrates,
Socrates, a teacher not an author,
author, "the purest
purest thinker
of
of the West."
As his
his succinct remarks about teaching teacMng earlyearly in these
lectures
lectures bear witness,
witness, Heidegger regards teacMng
Heidegger regards teaching as an
exalted
exalted activity wMch has nothing
activity which nothing to do with "becoming
"becoming aa
famous
famous professor"
professor" or an expert
expert in one's field. Instead, he
field. Instead,
likens
likens itit to
to the master-apprentice
master-apprentice relation of the medieval
guilds,
guilds, where the purpose
purpose of the teaching
teaching craft is is to "let
learning
learning occur." This can take place place only
only when the teacher
xvii
xvn
xviii INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
isis "more
"more teachable
teachable than than thethe apprentices/
apprentices," able
7
able to
to impart
impart by by
his own
his own example
example the the proper
proper relatedness
relatedness to to the
the subject
subject matter
matter
being learned. In the present lectures it
being learned. In the present lectures
it is
is evident
evident thatthat
Heidegger is
Heidegger is first
first and
and foremost
foremost preoccupied
preoccupied with with the
the stu
stu-
dents before
dents before him,
him, only
only secondarily
secondarily withwith the
the wider
wider circle
circle of
of
readers who will
readers will necessarily
necessarily missmiss the
the vital character and
vital character and
nuances of of the
the spoken
spoken word.
In order
In order to to aid
aid these
these students
students in in maintaining
maintaining continuity
continuity
in lectures
in lectures delivered
delivered at at weekly
weekly intervals,
intervals, Heidegger
Heidegger pro pro-
vided in
vided in every
every casecase aa summary
summary of of the
the preceding
preceding lecture,
lecture, aa
summary which is
summary is also
also aa transition
transition to the new material.
to the material. At
his expressed
Ms expressed wish
wish we have placed placed these
these Stundenubergdnge
Stundenubergange
at the
at the beginning
beginning of of each
each lecture,
lecture, rather grouping them
rather than grouping
at the
at the back
back of of the
the two parts
parts ofof the book as in the German
as in
edition. Though
edition* Though Heidegger
Heidegger rarely rarely summarizes exactly exactly
what he said said the
the previous
previous week, procedure does make
this procedure
week, this
for
for considerable repetition. Such repetition
considerable repetition. repetition occurs naturally
naturally
in every lecture
in every lecture course and these these lectures
lectures were not revised
for
for publication,
publication, as as a note on the flyleaf
flyleaf informs us. us. But for
aa man who puts puts asas much emphasis
emphasis as Heidegger on the way
as Heidegger way
anything
anything is said and who reflects
is said reflects on what he himself
thought
thought a week earlier, earlier, the repetition
repetition of a thought
thought is is sig-
sig
nificant.
nificant. The transitions
transitions also contribute to
also contribute to the informal
nature of the lectureslectures with their frequent frequent asides and po po-
lemical remarks,
remarks, which which the conventions of written prose prose
scarcely
scarcely allow.
allow. In these and other ways ways Heidegger
Heidegger the
teacher is is revealed.
revealed.
In his
his intellectual
intellectual development
development this this book proves
proves to to be
something
something of of aa turning
turning point.
point. During
During the late late 'thirties
'thirties and
into the 'forties
'forties Heidegger
Heidegger was deeply deeply involved with the
thought
thought of Nietzsche. It It seemed to him necessary
necessary to to come
to
to grips
grips with
with Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's absolutizing
absolutizing of the will as as aa cul-
cul
mination
mination of of Western
Western metaphysics.
metaphysics. By By the time of the lec- lec
tures
tures here translated,
translated, it it is
is clear
clear that Nietzsche's thinkingthinking
has been absorbed,
has been absorbed, "first"first found,
found, and
and then
then lost,"
lost," as
as he
he puts
puts
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION :xix
XIX
it.
it. The difficulty
difficulty of first
first finding and then losing Nietzsche
finding losing Nietzsche
causes him to
causes to recommend to his students
to his students that that "they
"they postpost-
pone
pone reading
reading Nietzsche for the time being, being, and first first study
study
Aristotle
Aristotle for ten to to fifteen
fifteen years."
years." In the the second
second half
half of of the
the
present
present volume,
volume, accordingly,
accordingly, we hear nothing nothing further
further of of
Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's doctrine of the will to power
will to power or or eternal
eternal recur
recur-
rence.
rence. To discover what thinkingthinking is is we are are instead
instead led
led back
to
to the origins
origins of Greek thinking Aristotle. It
before Aristotle.
thinking before is clear
It is clear
that
that the ideas which have preoccupiedpreoccupied him in in Germany's
Germany's
chaotic
chaotic decades between 1930 1950 and 1950 are are gradually
gradually "be be-
ing
ing replaced
replaced by by the themes of the 'fifties
of the 'fifties and 'sixties.
'sixties.
These themes are frequently suggested in
frequently suggested in the
the present
present
volume,
volume, even adumbrated,
adumbrated, but not not really
really developed.
developed. The
one most noticeable
noticeable is is the nature of language,
language, which has
come toto hold the center of his attention till
his attention till the
the present
present and
has received
received itsits fullest
fullest treatment in the book Unterwegs
in the Unterwegs zur
Sprache, 1959 (to
Sprache, (to appear
appear later in this
later in this translation
translation series).
series).
To be sure,
sure, Heidegger
Heidegger has long long before this this reflected
reflected on the
mysterious
mysterious nature of language language in its its relation
relation to to thinking
thinking
and Being.
Being. But in the present
present lectures one can note progress progress
toward the conception
conception of language
language as as that
that sphere
sphere in which
man can dwell aright aright and make clear clear to to himself who he is. is.
Here Heidegger
Heidegger is is more directly
directly concerned with the way way
language
language relates
relates toto thinking
thinking and its its response
response to to the call
call of
thought.
thought. Later he will make language
will make, language itself
.
itself the focus of
his
his reflections
reflections and meditations. In this sense What Is
this sense Is Called
Thinking?
Thinking? is is a signpost
signpost on Heidegger's
Heidegger's way. way.
The other theme increasingly
increasingly to to capture
capture his his attention is is
the nature of modern science and technology. technology. It will doubt
It will doubt-
less
less shock the American reader to to learn in in these lectures
lectures
that "science does not think." Even when such a reader
that
remembers that that the term "science" for for Europeans
Europeans includes
history,
history, literature,
literature, and philosophy
philosophy as as well as as the natural
sciences,
sciences, he willwill still affronted. He has probably
still be affronted. probably sus- sus
pected
pected that
that the "later" Heidegger
Heidegger is is anti-science
anti-science and mysti- mysti-
3OL
:XX INTRODUCTION
INTR.ODUCTION
cal
cal and
and this
this assertion
assertion by by Heidegger
Heidegger is is likely
likely toto confirm his Ms
opinion.
opinion. But if if he continues
continues to to read with sufficient
sufficient thought-
thought-
fulness,
fulness, he will
will note
note much later
later in
in this
this book that
that "science
"science
does not
not think
think in in the
the way
way thinkers
thinkers think." In a certain certain sense
sense
then
then Heidegger
Heidegger is is deliberately
deliberately trying
trying to to shock such a reader
as he was his his students.
students. No doubt this this is is an aspect
aspect of of his
his
pedagogical
pedagogical method,method, though
though his his assertion
assertion has a more imim
portant
portant purpose.
purpose. Those who are acquainted acquainted with his his later
later
essays
essays on science
science and technology
technology will will be hesitant
hesitant to to accept
accept
the impression
impression that
that he is
is anti-science
anti-science or that
that he is
is neces-
neces
sarily
sarily pessimistic
pessimistic about present present developments.
developments. It It certainly
certainly
seems so so but things
things areare seldom what they they seem in this man's
in this
writings.
writings.
If
If "the most thought-provoking
thought-provoking thing thing about our our
thought-provoking
thought-provoking age" age" isis "that we are still still not
not thinking,"
thinking,"
it has always
it always been thus since since the early
early Greeks.
Greeks. As he makes
clear
dear in thisthis volume,
volume, Heidegger
Heidegger is is neither
neither pessimistic
pessimistic nor
optimistic about the times in which we live.
optimistic live. ItIt is only that
is only that
the nature of our technological
technological age age requires
requires thinking
thinking more
than earlier ages, for modern man conceives
earlier ages, conceives himself
himself pre pre-
pared to
pared to take dominion over the earth earth and his his capacities
capacities for for
good and ill
good ill are vastly augmented.
vastly augmented.
Organized knowledge, that is,
Organized knowledge, is, the natural
natural and human human-
istic
istic sciences,
sciences, is is not on a lower level level than thinking
thinking as as Hei
Hei-
degger understands it.
degger it. Moreover,
Moreover, the sciencessciences are are more and
more determining
determining the charactercharacter of of contemporary
contemporary reality. reality.
spring from an authentic
They spring authentic sourcesource in in our
our Western
heritage, for techne was for
heritage, for the
the Greeks aa speciesspecies ofof knowl
knowl-
edge and in
edge its own way a disclosure
in its disclosure of of truth
truth and Being.
Being. ItsIts
predominance in our time calls
predominance calls for
for another
another kind kind of of re
re-
sponse, namely
sponse, namely thinking,
thinking, which stems stems from aa different different
source than technd
source techne but also also Greek.
Greek. At all all events
events in in the
the
present work Heidegger
present Heidegger is is not
not directly
directly concerned
concerned with with thethe
nature of
nature of science,
science, but with the the nature
nature of of tiainking,
thinking, whichwhich he he
conceives to
conceives to be quite
quite another matter.
matter.
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION xxi
What is is it
it that Heidegger does
Heidegger does call thinking? It
call thinking? im-
is im
It is
portant
portant to to say
say first
first of all
all what he does does notnot call
call thinking.
thinking.
Thinking
Thinking is, is, in the first
first place,
place, not what we call call having
having an
opinion
opinion or a notion. Second,Second, it is not representing
it is representing or or having
having
an idea (vorstellen)
(vorstellen) about something something or or aa state
state of affairs.
of affairs.
This is is an important
important negation
negation for for Heidegger,
Heidegger, which he
dealt
dealt with at at greater length in "Conversations
greater length "Conversations on aa Coun Coun-
try Path about Thinking"
try Thinking" in Discourse on Thinking
in Discourse Thinking
(Harper & Row,
(Harper Row, 1965).
1965) Third,
. thinking is
Third, thinking is not
not ratiocina
ratiocina-
tion,
tion, developing
developing a a chain of of premises
premises which lead lead toto a valid
valid
conclusion. Lastly,
Lastly, itit is
is not conceptual
conceptual or systematic in
or systematic the
in the
sense
sense favored by by the German idealistic tradition, the
idealistic tradition, the concept
concept
or Begriff
or Begriff believed by by Hegel
Hegel to thinking par
to be thinking excellence.
par excellence.
Heidegger
Heidegger is, is, however,
however, not denying denying the importance
importance of of
these conceptions thinking. He is
conceptions of thinking. is hardly
hardly aa "nothing
"nothing but"
kind of philosopher.
philosopher. Opining, representing, reasoning,
Opining, representing, reasoning, con con-
ceiving--all
ceiving all have their
their place
place and functionfunction;5 theythey areare more
useful and necessary
necessary in most respects respects than is is thinking
thinking as as he
understands it. it. These accustomed ways of
ways of grasping
grasping think think-
ing,
ing, as he remarks in this this book,
book, are are soso stubborn "because
they
they have theirtheir own truth." There is is always
always a struggle
struggle to to
advance a new way way of seeing things because customary
seeing things customary
ways
ways and preconceptions
preconceptions about it it stand in in the way. way. The
situation is is similar to to learning
learning a a foreign
foreign language
language : forget-
:
forget
ting
ting our mother tongue
tongue is is the chief difficulty.
chief difficulty.
Furthermore,
Furthermore, Heidegger
Heidegger makes no claim that that thinking
thinking
can produce
produce knowledge
knowledge as as do the sciences,
sciences, nor can it it pro
pro-
mote usable practical
practical wisdom,
wisdom, solve solve anyany cosmic riddles,
riddles, or
endow us directly
directly with the power power to to act.
act. There is is no salva
salva-
tion to
to be found
f ound in it.it. In allall these waysways it it is
is clearly
clearly inferior
inferior
to
to the sciences
sciences and to to all
all these activities
activities which commonly commonly
pass
pass for
for thinking. Nevertheless,
thinking. Nevertheless, thinking thinking in
in his
his sense does
sense
have its
its own importance
importance and relevance. Heidegger Heidegger is is clearly
clearly
working
working toward a theory theory of the independent
independent role role of a kind
of thinking
tMnking that is is atat once poetic philosophic. Like
poetic and philosophic.
xxii INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
many other
many other Continental
Continental thinkers
thinkers today,
today, lie
he wants
wants to insist
to insist
on aa new
on new conception
conception of
of philosophy
philosophy as an autonomous
as an autonomous
inquiry.
inquiry.
For Heidegger
For Heidegger thinking
thinking isis aa response
response onon our
our part to aa
part to
call which
call which issues
issues from thethe nature
nature of things, from
of tilings, from Being
Being
itself. be able
itself. To be able to think does
to think does not
not wholly depend on
wholly depend on our
our
will and
wiH and wish,
wish, though
though much does depend on
does depend whether we
on whether we
prepare ourselves to
prepare ourselves to hear that
that call
call to think when
to think when itit conies
comes
respond to
and respond to it
it in
in the
the appropriate
appropriate manner. Thinking is
manner. Thinking is
determined by
determined by that
that which isis to
to be
be thought
thought asas well
well as by him
as by
thinks. It
who thinks. It involves
involves not
not only
only man's
man's receptivity
receptivity to
to Being
Being
but also
but also Being's
Being's receptivity to man. The history
receptivity to history and situa
situa-
tion of
tion of man in
in aa given
given age
age often
often covers
covers up
up the nature of
of
reality and
reality
and renders
renders it it impossible
impossible to to receive
receive the message
message of
Being.
Being.
Thinking is not
Tb.iriTn.-ng is
not so so much an act act asas a way
way of living
living or
dwel.ling--as
dwelling as we in in America would put put it,
it, aa way
way of life.
life. It
It
is
is a remembering who we are as
a remembering as human beingsbeings and where
we belong.
belong. It is a gathering
It is gathering and focusingfocusing of our whole
selves
selves on what lieslies before us and a taking taking toto heart and mind
these
these particular
particular things
things before us in in order to to discover in
them their
their essential
essential nature and truth. Learning Learning how to
obviously aid us in this
think can obviously this discovery. Heidegger's
discovery. Heidegger's
conception
conception of truth as as the revealing
revealing of what is concealed, in
is concealed,
distinction
distinction toto the
the theory
theory of truth as as correctness or corre-corre
spondence,
spondence, is is probably
probably his his most seminal thought thought and phi- phi
losophy's
losophy's essential
essential task,
task, as
as he sees
sees it.
it. The nature of reality
reality
and of man is is both hidden and revealed;revealed it
5
it both appears
appears and
withdraws from view, not in
from view, in turn but concomitantly.
concomitantly. Only Only
the thinking
thinking that is is truly
truly involved,
involved, patient,
patient, and disciplined
disciplined
by long practice
by long practice can come
come to
to know either
either the hidden or dis-
dis
closed character
closed character of of truth.
truth.
The final
The final lecture
lecture in in this
this volume,
volume, which parallels
parallels the last
last
chapter
chapter in in Introduction
Introduction to to Metaphysics,
Metaphysics, bringsbrings out most
clearly-more
clearly more clearly
clearly in in my
my judgment
judgment than than did thethe earlier
earlier
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION xxiii
book-Heidegger's
book Heidegger's central central intuitions
intuitions about the the nature
nature of of
thinking.
thinking. It It represents
represents his Ms attempt
attempt to to translate
translate the the famous
saying
saying of Parmenides about the the relation
relation of of saying
saying and
thinking
thinking to Being.
Being. What HeideggerHeidegger is is here suggesting
suggesting is is
that thinking
thinking is is a concrete seeing and saying of
seeing saying of the the way
way thethe
world is.is. Man is is an integral part of
integral part of this this world and can can
realize
realize it by asking
it by asking questions
questions of of it,
it, profound
profound and naive na1ve
questions,
questions, and by by waiting
waiting "even a a whole lifetime"
lifetime" for for the
the
disclosures
disclosures that may may come. Thinking
Thinking is is unlike
unlike anyany other act act
insofar
insofar as it it is
is an act
act at all. It
at all. is aa calling
It is calling in in more than one
sense
sense ofof that richly evocative
that richly evocative word. Thinking Thinking definesdefines thethe
nature of being
being human and the more thoughtless thoughtless we are, are,
the less
less human we are. are.
Yet thinking
thinking is is inherent in in man as as aa being-in-the-world.
being-in-the-world.
Hence learning
learning to to think is is as
as much a discovery
discovery of our own
nature as it is
as it is a discovery
discovery of the the nature
nature of of Being.
Being. Every
Every
doctrine
doctrine of of man's nature,
nature, as as he tells
tells us
us inin these
these lectures,
lectures, is is
at
at one and the same time a doctrine of Being. And every
of Being. every
doctrine
doctrine of Being
Being is is by
by the same token a doctrine doctrine of human
nature. That is is to say, the relatedness of man to
to say, to Being
Being is is
so
so integral
integral that inquiry
inquiry into one involves involves of necessity
necessity the
other,
other, too.
too.
This book closes
closes with a question, appropriately, since
question, appropriately, since the
title
title and indeed most of the lectures lectures areare an extended ques ques-
tion.
tion. To this
this question
question no answer is is given
given in the sense sense of of a
definition or description.
description. Indeed Heidegger Heidegger teaches that
none can be given.given. As we learn in in the opening
opening sentence
sentence: :
"We come to thinking means when we ourselves

to know what thinking
try to
try to think." To define thinking thinking for for someone else else would
be as
as hopeless
hopeless as as describing
describing colors
colors toto the
the blind.
blind. Thinking
Thinking is is
questioning
questioning and putting putting ourselves in question question as as much as as
the cherished opinions
opinions and inherited doctrines doctrines we have long long
taken for
for granted.
granted. Each must learn learn to to do it it for
for himself.
himself.
Heidegger
Heidegger as as teacher demonstrates and encourages encourages his his stu-
stu
dents
dents toto follow suit.
suit. The result
result of of such questioning
questioning is is not
:xxiv
3OC1V INTRODUCTION
INTR.OD U CTI ON
negative or
negative or skeptical.
skeptical. Despite
Despite diversions
diversions and
and asides,
asides, the
the
course of
course of these
these lectures
lectures advances
advances Heidegger's
Heidegger's theme
theme in
in such
such
a way
way that
that we learn
learn a good
good deal about how to
deal about to question
question
rightly.
rightly.
This intimate
This intimate connection
connection between thinking
thinking and
and ques
ques-
tioning is
tioning is central
central to
to everything
everything Heidegger
Heidegger is is trying
trying to
to learn
leam
by these
by these exercises
exercises in thinking. Putting
in thinking. Putting in
in question
question isis not
primarily aa method for
primarily for him as
as it
it was for
for Descartes
Descartes and for
his teacher
his teacher HusserL
Husserl. least it
At least it is
is not aa method in
in the sense
that one
that one uses
uses it
it as
as aa preliminary
preliminary to to building
building up
up a body
body of
of
doctrine after tearing
doctrine after tearing down earlier
earlier systems.
systems. No,
No, for Hei
Hei-
degger questioning
degger questioning is a way
is a or path
way or path ofof thinking
thinking each one
must clear for himself
clear for himself with no certain
certain destination
destination in mind.
It might be likened
It might likened to
to making
making a first
first path
path on skis
skis through
through
new-fallen snow or
new-fallen or clearing way for
clearing a way for oneself
oneself through
through
dense
dense forest
forest growth.
growth. Questioning thinking are
Questioning and thinking are not a
means toto an end;
end; they self-justifying. To think is
they are self-justifying. is to
to be
underway,
underway, a favorite
favorite word of crucial importance
of crucial importance to to Hei
Hei-
degger.
degger. His general
general question constant, namely
question remains constant, namely the
relation
relation of human being being and other beings
beings to
to Being
Being as such;
such 5
but the way

way changes
changes frequently
frequently since he often gets gets onto
bypaths
bypaths and dead-ends. His persistencepersistence in holding
holding to the
question
question he has chosen to to think about as as well as his
his flexi-
flexi
bility
bility in approach
approach to to it
it are sources of admiration,
admiration, even
among
among the ranks of of his
his detractors.
detractors.
Since thinking
thinking and questioning
questioning are so so nearly
nearly synony-
synony
mous,
mous, it
it is
is difficult
difficult for
for critics
critics and historians
historians of thought
thought toto
classify and "locate" him in

classify in the tradition.
tradition. In Germany
Germany he
is
is sometimes held to to be a
a continuator of Hegel
Hegel or Nietzsche.
Or often he is
Or is thought to
thought to be a modem modern follower of Par-
menides or or Heraclitus.
Heraclitus. Despite
Despite his great
great love for the Greeks
and
and his familiarity
familiarity with Western philosophic
philosophic thought,
thought, II
believe it
it is
is aa fundamental
fundamental mistake to to read Heidegger
Heidegger as as a
a
follower this or that previous
follower of this previous thinker. He seems to to me to
to
have
have nono basic
basic dependence
dependence on on any
any predecessors,
predecessors, not even hishis
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION XXV
own previous thought- If

previous thought. If his
his thinking
thinking is is never carried
carried on in in
disregard
disregard of the tradition,
tradition, he is is rarely
rarely satisfied
satisfied with the the
conclusions
conclusions of others nor, nor, after
after a a time,
time, with his his own. Close
Close
students
students of his well realize
realize how far far he has has come since Being
since Being
and Time,
Time, however they they may divide on the
may divide the question
question of of
whether there has been a decisive decisive "turn" since since that
that early
early
work. Today,
Today, at at age
age seventy-nine,
seventy-nine, he starts starts every
every morning
morning
afresh,
afresh, without any any secure base in in past
past systems
systems of of thought
thought
and still
still dissatisfied
dissatisfied with what he himself has worked out. out.
A future age
A age may
may well considerconsider his his contribution
contribution to to phi
phi-
losophy
losophy to to be that
that of an initiator
initiator of of new approaches
approaches and
perspectives
perspectives on our common inheritance, inheritance, rather rather than any any
new content or doctrine.
doctrine. He seeks seeks to to press
press beyond
beyond systems
systems
and concepts-to
concepts to live
live in in the meta as as he here suggests
suggests was
the
the simple
simple and therefore
therefore inexhaustible significance of
inexhaustible significance of
Greek thought.
thought. The one aspect aspect of of that
that thought
thought seized
seized upon
upon
by
by the Christian
Christian Middle Ages Ages and carriedcarried overover into
into modern
thought,
thought, fruitful as as it
it has been, believes to
been, he believes to have reached
an impasse
impasse today.
today. The only only wayway to to go
go forward is is to
to return
to
to the origins
origins and seek a new beginning. beginning.
The advance Heidegger
Heidegger wishes to make on the
to the basis
basis of
of
Greek thought
thought is is toto learn to non-conceptually and
to think non-conceptually
non-systematically
non-systematically yet yet with rigor strictness about the
rigor and strictness
nature ofof Being.
Being. By By so so doing
doing he hopes hopes to to avoid the subjec-
subjec
tivity
tivity involved in separating
separating human being being and Being, Being, sub
sub-
ject and object.
ject object. He desiresdesires a thinking
thinking that that is at once
is at
receptive
receptive in the sensesense of a listening attending to
listening and attending to what
things
things convey
convey to to us and active in in the sense that that we respond
respond
to
to their
their call.
call. Only
Only when we are really really immersed in in what is is
to
to be thought
thought can we reveal truly truly the nature of of anything
anything
no matter how commonplace
commonplace it may be,
it may be, and only only then can
we avoid our habitual
habitual waysways of grasping
grasping it it as it is
as it us, i.e.,
is for us, .#.,
subjectively.
subjectively.
The call
call of thought
thought is is thus the the call
call toto be attentive
attentive to to
things
things as
as they
they are,
are, to to let
let them be as as they
they are,
are, and to to think
XXVI
XXVl INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
them and ourselves together. 'Ibis

ourselves together. This is,is, of
of course,
course, difficult,
difficult,
all
all the more so so asas Heidegger believes in
Heidegger believes in this
this man-centered
age
age of ours. It
of ours. It is
is an age in
age in which "we considerconsider it it quite
quite in in
order thatthat we cannot all all follow thethe thought
thought processes
processes of of
modern theoretical
theoretical physics.
physics. But to to learn
learn the thinking
thinking of of
thinkers
thinkers is is essentially
essentially more difficult,
difficult, not because that that think
think-
ing
ing is is still
still more involved
involved but because
because it it is
is simple."
simple." Never Never-
theless,
theless, if if we persist
persist inin attempting
attempting to to master the the handicraft
handicraft
of thinking,
thinking^ it it is
is not impossible. Heidegger is
impossible. Heidegger is persuaded
persuaded
that man is is naturally
naturally inclined
inclined to to think and Being Being desires
desires
to
to be thought
thought truly.
truly.
To offer
offer a translation
translation of of a Heideggerian
Heideggerian work requires requires
aa measure of of courage,
courage, perhaps better named rashness.
perhaps better rashness. The
reasons
reasons are are clearly
clearly stated
stated inin the present volume. A transla
the present transla-
tion
tion is is necessarily
necessarily an interpretation, according to
interpretation, according to him,
him, and
also
also every
every genuine
genuine thinking
thinking is is ambiguous in
ambiguous in its its very
very nature.
nature.
"Multiplicity
"Multiplicity of of meanings
meanings is is the element in in which thoughtthought
must move in order to to be strict thought," he tells
strict thought," tells hishis stu
stu-
dents. Or again,again, to to move within language
language is is like
like moving
moving
"on the billowing
billowing waters of an ocean." Heidegger Heidegger revels revels
in the ambiguity
ambiguity of the German language language and in the multi multi-
ple
ple meanings
meanings of the words he chooses. chooses. He thinks poetically,
poetically,
all
all the more the older he becomes. Translators Translators can never be
sure in a given given case which of these these meanings
meanings Heidegger
Heidegger
wishes to to predominate.
predominate. One can, can, ofof course,
course, use two or more
English
English words for a single single German term, term, and this this we have
frequently
frequently done.
It
It gradually
gradually becomes clear to translator, however,
to a translator, however, that that
Heidegger
Heidegger rarely rarely abandons the idiomatic
idiomatic sense
sense of of aa German
word,
word, no matter how technical or or terminological
terminological its its over
over-
tones.
tones. He has great respect for the common idiom,
great respect idiom, though
though
none at all all for the commonness of of thoughtless
thoughtless usage.usage. Most
of his words retain as as much as possible of
as possible of their
their root
root mean
mean-
ings
ings in their Greek,Greek, Latin,
Latin, or Old German origins. origins. Hence,Hence,
we have tried tried toto stick
stick toto Anglo-Saxon equivalents where
Anglo-Saxon equivalents
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION xxvii
XXYli
we could,
could, and toto keep
keep uppermost
uppermost the the simple, non-technical
simple, non-technical
sense
sense of what he is is trying to say. This way
trying to say. way it it is
is easier
easier for
the philosophically
philosophically sophisticated reader to
sophisticated reader to supply
supply thethe con
con-
temporary
temporary technical connotations of of these
these words,
words, and for for
the layman
layman in philosophy
philosophy not to to miss
miss the essential
essential message
message
of
of this
this book.
Though
Though Heidegger
Heidegger was extremely helpful in
extremely helpful in answering
answering
my
my questions
questions about the meaning
meaning of of aa term,
term, aa sentence,
sentence, or or aa
whole passage,
passage, Fred Wieck and II would not claim that that we
have caught
caught the intended emphasis
emphasis in in every
every case.
case. This may may
well be the first
first Heidegger translation in
Heidegger translation in English
English to to be
worked out in close
close cooperation
cooperation with the the author.
author. But it it does
does
not pretend
pretend toto be an authorized translation. Martin Hei
authorized translation. Hei-
degger
degger does not know English well enough
English well enough for that. How-
for that.
ever,
ever, we do believe that it it is
is as close to
as close to the
the author's
author's inten
inten-
tions
tions asas our own limitations
limitations in in understanding
understanding and the the
requirements
requirements of readable English allow. If
English allow. If it it remains,
remains,
nonetheless, interpretation, we trust
nonetheless, an interpretation, trust that
that it
it is
is one which
is
is faithful
faithful to
to the spirit
spirit and substance of of the original.
original.
PART
·-·
ONE
LECTURE
LECTURE
II
·-·
We come to
We to know what it it means to when we ourselves
to think "when
try
try to think. If
to think. If the attempt
attempt is successful, we must be
is to be successful,
ready
ready toto learn thinking.
thinking.
As soon asas we allow ourselves to to become involved in such
learning, we have admitted that we are not yet
learning, yet capable
capable
of thinking.
iJainking.
Yet man is being who can think,
is called the being think, and rightly
rightly
so. Man is
so. Man is the rational animal. Reason.,Reason, ratio,
ratio evolves in
',
thinking.
thinking. Being
Being the rational animal,animal, man must be capable capable
of thinking
thinking if
if he really
really wants to.
to. Still,
Still, it
it may
may be that man
man
wants toto think, Perhaps he wants too much when
think, but can't. Perhaps
he wants to think,
think, and so little. Man can think
so can do too little.
in the sense that he possesses
possesses the possibility
possibility to do so. This
possibility
possibility alone,
alone, however,
however, is is no guarantee
guarantee to us that we we are
capable
capable of thinking.
thinking. For we are capablecapable of doing
doing only
only what
we are
are inclined to to do. And again,
again, we truly
truly incline only
only
toward something
something that in turn inclines toward us, us, toward
our essential
essential being,
being, by by appealing
appealing to our essential being being as
the
the keeper who holds us
keeper who us in
in our being. What keeps
our essential being. keeps
us
us in
in our
our essential
essential nature holds us only only so long,
long, however,
however, as
we for
we for our
our part
part keep
keep holding
holding on to what holds us. And we we
keep it out of our memory.
keep holding
holding on on to
to it
it by
by not
not letting
letting it
Memory
Memory is is the
the gathering
gathering of of thought.
thought. Thought
Thought of what?
5
4 WHAT CALLED THINKING?
Thought
Thought of of what holdsholds us,us, in that we give
in that give itit thought
thought pre pre-
cisely
cisely because It It remains what must be thought thought about.about.
Thought
Thought has the gift gift ofof thinking
thinking back,back, aa gift
gift given
given because
we incline
incline toward it. Only when we are
it. Only are so
so inclined
inclined toward
what in in itself
itself is
is to
to be thought about, only
thought about, only then are we capa capa-
ble
ble of thinking.
thinking.
In
In order
order to to be capable
capable of thinking, we need to
of tbjnkjng, to learn itit
first.
first. What is is learning? Man learns
learning? learns when he disposes disposes every-
every
thing
thing he does does soso that
that it it answers to to whatever essentials
essentials areare
addressed
addressed to to him at at any given moment. We
any given We learn to think
to think
by givmg our mind to
by giving to what there is is to^tfimKabout.
What is is essential
essential in a friend, for example,
example, is wljat we call
is'w4ilt call
%i
friend, for
"friendly." In
"friendly." In the
the same sense sense we now call call "thought-pro
"thought-pro-
voking"
voking" what in in itself
itself is is to
to be thought
thought about.
about. Everything
Everything
thought-provoking gives
thought-provoking gives us us to think. But it
to think. it always
always gives
gives
that
that gift just so far as the thought-provoking
gift just so far as thought-provoking matter al al-
ready is
ready is intrinsically
intrinsically what must be thought thought about.
about. From
now on,on, we will will call
call "most thought-provoking"
thought-provoking" what re re-
mains to to be thought
thought about always, always, because it it is
is at
at the begin
begin-
ning,
ning, before all all else.
else. What is is most thought-provoking?
thought-provoking?
How doesdoes itit show itself
itself in thought-provoking time?
in our thought-provoking
Most thought-provoking
thought-provoking is that we are
is that are still
still not
not thinking
thinking
-notnot even yet,yet, although
although the state state of the world is is becoming
becoming
constantly
constantly more thought-provoking.
thought-provoking. True, True, thisthis course of
events seems to to demand rather that that man should act, with-
act, with
out delay,
delay, instead of making speeches at
making speeches at conferences and
international conventions and never getting getting beyond
beyond pro pro-
posing
posing ideas
ideas on what ought ought to be, and how it
to be, it ought
ought to to be
done. What is is lacking, then,
lacking, then, is action, not thought.
is action, thought.
And yet-it
yet it could be that prevailing man has for for centuries
centuries
prevailing
now acted too much and thought thought too little. But how dare
too little.
anyone
anyone assert
assert today
today that we are are still
still not thinking,
thinking, todaytoday
when there is is everywhere
everywhere a lively lively and constantly
constantly more
audible interest in philosophy,philosophy, when almost almost everybody
everybody
claims to to know what philosophy
philosophy is is aU
all about!
about! Philosophers
Philosophers
PART
PART I I 5
are the thinkers

are the par excellence.
thinkers par excellence. They are
They are called
called thinkers
thinkers
precisely because thinking properly takes
precisely because thinking properly
takes place
place in in phi
phi-
losophy.
losophy.
Nobody will
Nobody will deny
deny that
that there
there isis anan interest
interestin philosophy
in philosophy
today. But
today. But-is there anything
is there anything at at all
all left
left today
today in in which
which
man does
man does notnot take
take anan interest,
interest, in the sense
in the sense in which he
in which he
understands "interest"?
understands "interest"?
Interest, interesse, means to
Interest, interesse, means
to be
be among
among and and in in the
the midst
midst
of things,
of things, or or toto be
be at
at the
the center
center of of aa thing
thing andand toto stay
stay with
with
it. But
it. But today's
today's interest
interest accepts
accepts as as valid
valid only
only what
what is is interest
interest-
ing. And interesting is
ing. And interesting
is the
the sort
sort of thing that
of thing that can freely be
can freely be
regarded as indifferent the next
regarded as indifferent the
next moment,
moment, and and be be displaced
displaced
by something
by something else, else, which then then concerns
concerns us us just
just asas little
little as
as
what went before.
what before. Many
Many peoplepeople today
today taketake thethe view
view thatthat
they are doing great to something by finding it
they are doing great honor to something by finding
it inter
inter-
esting.
esting. The truth
truth isis that
that such
such an opinion
opinion has alreadyalready rele rele-
gated the interesting thing to to the ranks of of what is is indiffer
indiffer-
gated the interesting thing
ent
ent andand soon
soon boring.
boring.
It is
It is no evidence
evidence of
of any
any readiness
readiness to to think that that people
people
show
show an an interest
interest in in philosophy.
philosophy. There is, is, of course,
course, serious
serious
preoccupation everywhere with philosophy
preoccupation everywhere philosophy and its its prob-
prob
lems.
lems. TheThe learned
learned world is is expending
expending commendable efforts
efforts
in the
in the investigation of the
the history
history of philosophy.
philosophy. These These are are
investigation of
useful
useful and and worthy
worthy tasks,
tasks, and
and onlyonly the
the best
best talents
talents are are good
good
enough for them, especially when when they
they present
present to to us models
us models
enough for them, especially
of
of great thinking. But
great thinking.
But even
even if we have
if we have devoted
devoted manymany yearsyears
to and writings the
of the
to the
the intensive
intensive studystudy of of the
the treatises
treatises and writings of
great thinkers, that
that fact
fact isis still
still no
no guarantee
guarantee that that we we our-
our
great thinkers,
selves
selves areare thinking,
On
thinking, or or even
even are are ready
ready to to learn
learn thinking.
thinking. On
the
the contrary-preoccupation more than than
contrary preoccupation with with philosophy
philosophy more
anything else may give us the the stubborn
stubborn illusion
illusion thatthat we we
anything else may give us
are
are thinking just because we
thinking just because
we areare incessantly
incessantly "philoso-
"philoso
phizing."
phizing."
Even to
Evenso, it remains strange, and
so, it remains strange,
and seems
seems presumptuous,
presumptuous, to
assert
assertthatthatwhat
whatisismostmostthought-provoking in our thought-
thought-provokingin our thought-
provoking time is
provoking is that
that we are still not thinking.
are still thinking. AccordAccord-
ingly,
ingly , we must prove prove thethe assertion.
assertion. Even more advisable advisable is is
first to explain
first to explain it. it. For it it could be that that the demand for a
proof
proof collapses
collapses as as soon as as enough light is
enough light is shed on what the
assertion says. It
assertion says. It runs:
runs :
Most thought-provoking
thought-provoking in in our thought-provoking
thought-provoking time
is
is that
that we are stillstill not thinking.
thinking.
It
It has
has been suggested earlier how the
suggested earlier the term "thought-
"thought-
provoking"
provoking" is is to
to be understood. Thought-provoking is
understood. Thought-provoking is what
gives
gives usus to
to think.
think. Let us us look
look at it closely,
at it closely, and from the the start
start
allow
allow each word its its proper
proper weight.
weight. Some things things are food for for
thought
thought in in themselves,
themselves, intrinsically,
intrinsically, so so toto speak
speak innately.
innately.
And some things things make an appeal appeal to to us to to give
give them
thought,
thought, to to turn toward them in in thought
thought : to : to think them.
What is is thought-provoking, what gives
thought-provoking, gives us to to think,
think, is is
then not anything
anything that that we determine,
determine, not anything anything that that
only
only we are instituting,
instituting, only only we are proposing.
proposing. According
According
to our assertion,
assertion, what of itself gives us most to
itself gives to think about,
about,
what is is most thought-provoking, is
thought-provoking, is this this-that that we are still
are still
not thinking.
thinking.
This now means:means We : We have still still not come face face to to face,
face,
have not yet yet come under the sway sway of of what intrinsically
intrinsically
desires
desires to be thought
thought about in an essential essential sense.
sense. Presum
Presum-
ably
ably the reason is is that we human beings beings do not yet yet suffi
suffi-
ciently
ciently reach out and turn toward what desires desires to to be thought.
thought.
If so,
so, the fact that we are still still not thinking would merely be
thinking merely
a slowness,
slowness, a delay delay in thinking
thinking or, or, atat most,
most, a neglect
neglect on
man's part.part. Such human tardiness could then be cured in
tardiness could in
human ways ways by appropriate measures. Human neglect
by the appropriate neglect
would give give us food for thought-but
thought but only only in in passing.
passing. The
fact that we are still
fact still not thinking would be thought-provok-
thinking thought-provok
ing,
ing, of course,
course, but being
being a momentary
momentary and curable condi
curable condi-
tion of modern man, man, it it could never be called called thethe one
one most
thought-provoking
thought-provoking matter. Yet that that isis what we call call it,
it, and
we suggest
suggest thereby
thereby the following:
following: that that we are are still
still not
not
PART II
PART 7
thinking
thinking isis by only because man does
by no means only does not yetyet tarn
turn
sufficiently
sufficiently toward that which,which, by by origin
origin and innately
innately,?
wants toto be thought
thought about since
since inin its
its essence
essence its
its remains
what must be thought
thought about. Rather, that
about. Rather, that we are are still
still not
not
thinking
thinking stems from the the fact that the thing
fact that thing itself
itself that
that must
be thought
thought about turns
turns away
away from man, man, has turned away away
long
long ago.
ago.
We will
We will want to to know at at once when that that event
event took
took
place. that, we will
place. Even before that, will ask still
still more urgently
urgently how
we could possibly
we; possibly know of any event. And finally,
any such event. finally, the
the
problems
problems which here lie lie in
in wait come rushing
rushing at at usus when
we add still
still further: that which really gives us
really gives us food for for
thought
thought did not turn away away from man at at some time or other
which can be fixedfixed in history-no,
history really must be
no, what really
thought
thought keeps
keeps itself away from man since
itself turned away since the
the bebe-
ginning.
ginning.
On the other hand, era man has always
hand, in our era always thought
thought
in some way;
way in fact,
5fact, man has thought
thought the profoundest
profoundest
thoughts,
thoughts, and entrusted them to memory. By
to memory. By thinking
thinking in
that way
way he did and does remain related related to
to what must be
thought.
thought. And yet yet man isis not capable
capable of really
really thinking
thinking asas
long
long as as that which must be thought about, withdraws.
thought about,
If
If we,
we, as
as we are here and now, now, will
will not be taken in by by
empty talk, we must retort
empty talk, everything said
retort that everything said so far is
so far is an
unbroken chain of hollow assertions, state besides
assertions, and state besides that
that
what has been presented
presented here has nothing
nothing toto do with scien
scien-
tific
tific knowledge.
knowledge.
It
It will be well to to maintain as as long
long as
as possible
possible such a
defensive attitude
attitude toward what has been said only in
said: only
: that
in that
attitude do we keep keep the distance needed for for a quick
quick running
running
dash byby which one or the other of of us may
may succeed in making
making
the leap
leap into thinking.
thinking. For it is true
it is true that
that what was said so
said so
far,
far, and the entire
entire discussion that
that is
is to
to follow,
follow, have nothing
nothing
to
to do with scientific
scientific knowledge, especially not if
knowledge, especially if the discus
discus-
sion
sion itself
itself is
is to
to be a thinking. situation is
thinking. This situation is grounded
grounded in
the fact
fact that
that science
science itself
itself does not think,
does not think, and cannot tMnk think
-which
which is is its
its good fortune,
good fortune, here meaning meaning the assurance
of its
its own appointed
appointed course.
course. Science does does not think.
think. This is is
aa shocking
shocking statement.
statement. Let the statement be shocMng shocking, even
?
though
though we immediately
immediately add the the supplementary
supplementary statement
that nonetheless
nonetheless science
science always
always and in in its
its own fashion
fashion has
to do with thinking.
thinking. That fashion, however, is
f ashion however,
?
is genuine
genuine and
consequently
consequently fruitful
fruitful only
only after the gulf
after the gulf has become visible visible
that lies
lies between thinking
thinking and the sciences,,
sciences, lieslies there un-
bridgeably.
bridgeably. There is is no bridge here
bridge here--only only thethe leap.
leap. Hence
there is
is nothing but mischief in
nothing in all
all the
the makeshift ties ties and
asses'
asses bridges
7
bridges by by which men today today would set set upup aa com
com-
fortable
fortable commerce between thinking thinking and the the sciences.
sciences.
Hence we, we, those
those ofof us who come from the the sciences,
sciences, must
endure what is is shocking and strange about thinking-
shocking strange thinking
assuming
assuming we are
are ready
ready to
to learn thinking.
thinking. To learn means to to
make everything
everything we do answer to to whatever essentials
essentials adad-
dress
dress themselves to to us atat the given
given moment. In order to to be
capable
capable of of doing
doing so,so, we must get underway. It
get underway. is important
It is important
above allall that on the way way on which we set set out when we
learn to think,
think, we do not deceive ourselves ourselves and rashly rashly byby-
pass
pass the pressing
pressing questions;
questions on the contrary,
5
contrary, we must allow
ourselves to to become involved in questions that
in questions that seek
seek what no
inventiveness can find. Especially we moderns can learn
find. Especially learn
only
only ifif we always
always unlearn at at the same time.time. Applied
Applied to to the
the
matter before us: us we can leam
: thinking only
learn thinking only if if we radically
radically
unlearn what thinking
thinking has been traditionally.
traditionally. To do that, that,
we must at the same time come to to know it. it.
We said : man still
We : still does not think, and this
think, this because
because what
must be thought
thought about turns away away from him; him; by by no means
only
only because man does not sufficiently reach out
sufficiently reach out and turn
to what is is to be thought.
thought.
What must be thoughtthought about, tums away
about, turns away from man. It It
withdraws from him. But how can we have the the least
least knowl
knowl-
edge
edge of something
something that withdraws from the the beginning,
beginning,
PART
PART II 9
if
how can we even give

give it
it a name?
name? Whatever
vVhatever withdraws,
withdraws,
refuses arrival.
refuses arrival. But
But-withdrawing
withdrawing is not
is nothing. With
not nothing. vVith-
drawal is is an event.
event. In fact,
fact, what
what withdraws
withdraws may may even
even concon-
cern and claim man more essentially
cern essentially than
than anything
anything present
present
that strikes
that strikes and touches
touches him. Being Being struck
struck byby actuality
actuality is is
what we like like to
to regard
regard as as constitutive
constitutive of of the
the actuality
actuality of of the
the
actual. However,
actual. However, in being being struck by by what is is actual.,
actual, man may may
be debarred
be debarred precisely
precisely from what concernsconcems and touches him
touches him in
-touches in the surely
surely mysterious
mysterious way way of of escaping
escaping
him by its withdrawal. The event of
by its of withdrawal could be
what is is most present
present in in all
all our present,
present, and so so infinitely
infinitely
exceed the
exceed the actuality
actuality of of everything actual.
everything actual.
What withdraws from us, us, draws us along along byby itsits very
very
withdrawal,
withdrawal, whether or or not we become aware of it it immedi
immedi-
ately,
ately, oror at all. Once we are drawn into
at all. withdrawal, we
into the withdrawal,
are
are drawing
drawing toward what draws, attracts us by
draws, attracts by its
its with
with-
drawal.
drawal. And once we, we, being
being so attracted, are drawing
so attracted, drawing to to-
ward what draws us, us, our essential nature alreadyalready bears the
stamp "drawing toward." As we are drawing
stamp of '_'drawing drawing toward
what withdraws,
withdraws, we ourselves are pointers pointing toward
pointers pointing
it. We are who we are by
it. We by pointing
pointing in that direction-not
direction not
like
like an incidental
incidental adjunct
adjunct but as follows: this this "drawing
"drawing
toward" is is in itself
itself an essential
essential and therefore constant
pointing
pointing toward what withdraws. To say say "drawing
"drawing to to-
ward" is is to
to say "pointing toward what withdraws."
say "pointing
To the extent that man is is drawing
drawing that way, points
way, he points
toward what withdraws. As he is is pointing
pointing that way, way, man is is
the pointer.
pointer. Man here is is not first
first of all man, and then also
all man, also
occasionally
occasionally someone who points. No drawn into what
points. No: :
withdraws,
withdraws, drawing
drawing toward it it and thus pointing
pointing into the
withdrawal,
withdrawal, man man first
first is
is man. His essential nature lies in
being
being such aa pointer.
pointer. Something
Something which in itself, itself, by
by its
its es-
es
sential
sential nature,
nature, is pointing, we call
is pointing, sign. As he draws to-
call a sign. to
ward
ward what withdraws,
withdraws, man is is aa sign.
sign. But since this sign sign
points
points toward
toward what what draws awar, away, itit points,
points, not so much at
10
IS CALLED THINKING?
WHAT IS
what draws
what draws away
away asas into
into the
the withdrawal.
withdrawal. The
The sign
sign stays
stays
without
without interpretation.
interpretation.
In
In aa draft
draft to
to one
one of
of his
his hymns,
hymns, Hoelderlin
Hoelderlin writes:
writes :
"We are
"We are aa sign
sign that
that is
is not
not read."
read."
He continues
He continues with
with these
these two
two lines:
lines :
"We feel
"We feel no
no pain,
pain, we almost have
Lost
Lost our tongue
tongue in foreign
foreign lands."
The several
The several drafts
drafts of of that
that hymn-besides
hymn besides bearing bearing such
titles
titles as
as "The
"The Serpent,"
Serpent/' "The "The Sign,"
Sign," "The Nymph"-also
Nymph" also
include the titletitle "Mnemosyne."
"Mnemosyne." This Greek word may may be
translated: Memory.
Memory. And since since the Greek word is is femi-
femi
nine,
nine., we break no rules rules if if we translate
translate "Dame Memory." Memory."
For Hoelderlin uses the Greek word Mnemosyne M nemosyne as as the
the
name of a Titaness. According According to to the
the myth,
myth, she she is is the
the
daughter
daughter of Heaven and Earth. Myth Myth means the the telling
telling
word. For the Greeks,
Greeks, to tell tell is to lay
is to lay bare and make appear appear
-both
both the appearance
appearance and that which has its its essence
essence in in
the appearance,
the appearance, its its epiphany. Mythos is
epiphany. Mythos is what has its its essence
essence
in its
in its telling
telling-what what is is apparent
apparent in in the unconcealedness
unconcealedness of of
its appeal. The mythos
its appeal. mythos is is that appeal
appeal ofof foremost and radical radical
concern to all human beings
to all beings which makes man think of of what
what
appears, what is
appears, is in being.
being. Logos
Logos says
says the
the same
same; mythos
$
mythos and and
logos are
logos are not,
not, asas our current historians
historians of of philosophy
philosophy claim, claim,
placed into
placed into opposition
opposition by by philosophy
philosophy as as such;
such; on on the the concon-
trary, the
trary, the early
early Greek thinkers
thinkers (Parmenides,
(Parmenides, fragment
fragment 8) 8)
are precisely
are precisely thethe ones
ones toto use
use mythos
mythos andand logos
logos in in thethe same
same
sense. Mythos
sense. M ythos and logos logos become
become separated
separated and and opposed
opposed
only at
only at the
the point
point where neitherneither mythos
mythos nor nor logos
logos can can keep
keep
to its
to its original
original nature.
nature. In In Plato's
Plato's work,
work, this
this separation
separation has has
already taken
already taken place.
place. Historians
Historians and and philologists,
philologists, by by virtue
virtue
of aa prejudice
of prejudice whichwhich modern
modern rationalism
rationalism adopted
adopted from from
Platonism, imagine
Platonism, imagine that that mythos
mythos waswas destroyed
destroyed by by logos.
logos. But But
nothing religious
nothing religious is is ever
ever destroyed
destroyed by by logic
logic; it
$
it isis destroyed
destroyed
only by
only by the
the God's
God's withdrawal.
withdrawal.
PART II
PART 11
11
Mnemosyne,
Mnemosyne, daughter
daughter of Heaven and Earth, Earth, bride
bride of of
Zeus,
Zeus, inin nine nights
nights becomes the mother of of the
the nine Muses.
l\luses.
Drama and music,
music, dance and poetry poetry areare of the womb of
of the of
Mnemosyne,
Mnemosyne, Dame Memory. Memory. It is plain
It is plain that
that the word
means something
something elseelse than merely
merely the psychologically
psychologically de de-
monstrable ability
ability to
to retain
retain a a mental representation,
representation, an idea, idea,
of
of something
something which is is past. Memory from Latin memar
past. Memory-from memor,y
mindful-has
mindful has in mind something something that that is in the
is in the mind,
mind,
thought.
thought. But when it is the name of
it is of the
the Mother of the
Muses,
Muses, "Memory"
"Memory" does not mean just just any
any thought
thought of of any
any-
thing
thing that can be thought.
thought. Memory
Memory is is the gathering
gathering and
convergence
convergence of thought
thought upon upon what everywhere
everywhere demands
to
to be thought
thought about firstfirst of all. Memory is
all. Memory is the gathering
gathering
of recollection,
recollection, thinking
thinking back.back. It It safely keeps and keeps
safely keeps keeps
concealed within it
concealed it that
that toto which at at each given
given time thought
thought
must be given
given before
before allall else, in everything
else, in everything thatthat essentially
essentially
is, everything that appeals to us as
is, everything that appeals to
as what has being
being and has
been in being. Memory,
in being. Memory, Mother of of the
the Muses
Muses-the think-
the think
ing
ing back to to what isis to
to be thought
thought is is the source and groundground
of poesy.
poesy. This isis why
why poesy
poesy is
is the water that at at times flows
backward toward the source, source, toward thinking
thinking as as aa thinking
thinking
back,
back, a recollection.
recollection. Surely,
Surely, as long as
as long as we take
take the view that
logic
logic gives
gives us any
any information about what thinking thinking is, is, we
shall
shall never be able
able toto think how much all all poesy
poesy rests
rests upon
upon
thinking back,
thinking back, recollection.
recollection. Poetry
Poetry wells up only from de
up only de-
voted thought
thought thinking
thinking back,
back, recollecting.
recollecting.
Under the heading
heading Mnemosrne,
Mnemosyne, Hoelderlin says says::
"We are a sign

sign that is
is not read . . .."
" . .
We? Who? We We the men of today,

today, of of a "today"
"today" that has
lasted
lasted since
since long
long ago
ago and will
will still
still last
last for a long
long time,
time, so
so
long
long that
that no calendar in history
history can give
give its
its measure. In the
same hymn,
hymn, "Mnemosyne,"
"Mnemosyne," it says: "Long
it says "Long is/The
: is/The time"
time"-
the
the time inin which we are a sign, is not read. And
sign that is
sign, a sign
this,
this, that we are
are a sign,
sign, a sign that is
sign that is not read
read-does this
does this
not give
give enough thought? What the poet
enough food for thought? poet says
says in
in
12
12 WHAT CALLEB THINKING?
IS CALLED
WHAT IS THINKING?
these
these words,
words, and
and those
those that
that follow,
follow, may
may have
have aa part
part inin show-
show
ing
ing us
us what
what is
is most
most thought-provoking:
thought-provoking preciselyprecisely what the
: the
assertion
assertion about
about ourour thought-provoking
thought-provoking time attempts attempts to to
think
think of. And that
of. And that assertion,
assertion, provided
provided onlyonly we explain
explain itit
properly,
properly, may
may throw
throw some
some little
little light for
light for us us upon
upon thethe poet's
poet's
word Hoelderlin's
word; 5
Hoelderlin's word,
word, in
in turn,
turn, because it it is
is aa word of of
poesy,
poesy, may summon us
may summon us with a larger
larger appeal,
appeal, and hence
greater
greater allure,
allure, upon
upon aa way
way ofof thought
thought that
that tracks
tracks inin thought
thought
what is
what is most thought-provoking. Even so, it
thought-provoking. so, it is
is as
as yet
yet ob-
ob
scure what purpose
purpose this
this reference to to the words of of Hoelder-
Mn is
lin is supposed
supposed to serve. It
to serve. It is
is still
still questionable with what
questionable
right
right we,
we, by
by way
way of an attempt
attempt toto think,
think, make mention of of a
poet,
poet, this
this poet
poet inin particular.
particular. And it it is
is also
also still unclear
still unclear
upon
upon what ground,
ground, and within what limits, limits, our reference
reference
to the poetic
poetic must remain.
Summary
Summary and Transition
Transition
By way of this this series lectures, we are

series of lectures, are attempting
attempting to to learn
learn
thinking. The way
thinking. way is long. We
is long. We dare taketake only
only aa few steps.
steps.
If
If all
all goes well, they will
goes well, they will take usus to
to the foothills
foothills of
of thought.
thought.
they will
But they will take us to places which we must explore
to places explore to to
point where only
reach the point only the leap will help
leap will help further.
further. The
leap alone takes us into
leap into the neighborhood
neighborhood where where thinking
thinking
resides. We
resides. We therefore shall shall take
take aa few practice
practice leaps
leaps right
right
at the start,
at though we won't notice
start, though notice itit at
at once,
once, nor
nor need
need to.
to.
contrast to
In contrast to a steady
steady progress,
progress, where
where we move un un-
awares from one thing thing toto the next
next and
and everything
everything remains
remains
alike, the leap
alike, leap takes
takes us abruptly
abruptly toto where
where everything
everything is is dif
dif-
ferent, so
ferent, so different
different that
that itit strikes
strikes us
us as as strange.
strange. Abrupt
Abrupt
means the the sudden
sudden sheer
sheer descent
descent oror rise
rise that
that marks
marks thethe
chasm's edge.
chasm's Though we may
edge. Though may not
not founder
founder in in such
such aa leap,
leap,
what
what thethe leap
leap takes
takes us
us to
to will
will confound
confound us. us.
It is
It is quite
quite in
in order,
order, then, that we
then, that we receive
receive notice
notice from
from thethe
very start
very start of
of what
what will
will confound
confound us.us. But
But all
all would
would notnot be
be
PAET II
PART 15
well ifif the strangeness

strangeness were due only only toto the
the fact
fact that
that you,
you,
the listeners,
listeners, are not yet yet listening enough. If
closely enough.
listening closely that
If that
were the case,case, you
you would be bound to to overlook
overlook completely
completely
the strangeness
strangeness which lies lies in the
the matter itself.
itself. The matter
matter
of thinking
thinking is is always
always confounding-all
confounding all the more in pro pro-
portion
portion as as we keepkeep clear
clear of prejudice.
prejudice. To keep keep clear
clear ofof
prejudice,
prejudice, we must be ready willing to
ready and willing to listen.
listen. Such
readiness
readiness allows us to to surmount the the boundaries in in which all all
customary
customary views are confined, confined, and to to reach
reach aa more open open
territory.
territory. In order to encourage such readiness,
to encourage readiness, II shall in-
shall in
sert
sert here some transitional
transitional remarks,
remarks, which will will also
also apply
apply
to
to all
aU subsequent
subsequent lectures.
lectures.
In universities
universities especially,
especially, the dangerdanger is is still
still very
very great
great
that
that we misunderstand what we hear of of thinking,
thinking, particu
particu-
larly
larly ifif the immediate subject subject of the discussion
discussion is is scientific.
scientific.
Is
Is there anyany place
place compelling
compelling us more forcibly forcibly to to rack
rack our
brains than the research and training institutions pursuing
training institutions pursuing
scientific
scientific labors? Now everyone unreservedly that
everyone admits unreservedly that
the arts and the sciences are totally totally different
different from each
other, though in official
other, though official oratory
oratory theythey are still
still mentioned
jointly. But if
jointly. if a distinction is is made between thinking thinking and
the sciences,
sciences, and the two are contrasted,
contrasted, that that is
is immediately
immediately
considered a disparagement
disparagement of science. science. There is is the fear
even that thinking
thinking mightmight open hostilities against
open hostilities against the sci sci-
ences,
ences, and becloud the seriousness and spoil spoil the joy joy of
scientific
scientific work.
But even if if those fears justified 7 which is
fears were justified, is emphati
emphati-
cally
cally not the case case,7 it
it would still tactless and tasteless
still be both tactless tasteless
to
to take a stand against
against science upon upon the very very rostrum that
serves
serves scientific
scientific education. Tact alone ought ought to to prevent
prevent allall
polemics
polemics here.
here. But there there isis another consideration as well. well.
Any
Any kind of polemicspolemics fails
fails from the outsetoutset to to assume the
attitude
attitude of of thinking.
thinking. The opponent's
opponent's role role is
is not the thinking
thinking
role.
role. Thinking
Thinking is is thinking
thinking onlyonly when it it pursues
pursues whatever
speaks
speaks for for a subject.
subject. Everything
Everything said said here defensively
defensively is is
always
always intended
intended exclusively
exclusively to subject. When
protect the subject.
to protect
we speak
speak of of the
the sciences
sciences as as we pursue
pursue our way, way, we shall shall be
speaking
speaking not not against
against but for them, for
for them, for clarity
clarity concerning
concerning
their
their essential
essential nature.
nature. This alone implies our conviction
alone implies
that
that thethe sciences
sciences are are inin themselves positively essential.
themselves positively essential.
However,
However, their their essence
essence is is frankly
frankly of of a different
different sort sort from
what ourour universities
universities today
today still fondly imagine
still fondly imagine it it to be. In
to be.
any case, we still
any case, still seem afraid
afraid of of facing
facing the exciting
exciting fact fact
that
that today's
today's sciences
sciences belong
belong in the realm of
in the of the essence
essence of
modern technology,
technology, and nowhere else. else. Be it it noted that II am
saying
saying "in "in thethe realm of of the essence
essence of of technology/'
technology," and
technology." A fog
u
not
not simply
simply "in in technology." fog still
still surrounds the es es-
sence of
sence of modem science. science. That fog, fog, however,
however, is is not pro pro-
duced by by individual
individual investigators
investigators and scholars scholars in in the
the sci-
sci
ences.
ences. ItIt is
is not
not produced
produced by by man at at all.
all. It
It arises
arises from the the
region
region of of what is thought-provoking that we are
is most thought-provoking-that are
still
still not thinking;
thinking^ none of us, including me who speaks
us, including speaks to to
you,
you, me firstfirst of all.
all.
This is is why
why we are here attemptingattempting to to learn thinking.
thinking.
We are all
We all on the way way together,
together, and are not reproving reproving each
other.
other. To learn learn means to everything we do answer
to make everything
to
to whatever essentials
essentials address themselves to to us at at aa given
given
time. Depending
Depending on the kind of of essentials,
essentials, depending
depending on
the realm from which they address us,
they address us, the
the answer and
with itit the kind of learning
learning differs.
differs.
A cabinetmaker's apprentice,
A apprentice, someone who is is learning
learning
to
to build cabinets
cabinets and the like, will serve
like, will serve as as an example.
example. His
learning
learning is is not mere practice,
practice, to to gain
gain facility
facility in in the
the use of of
tools.
tools. Nor does he merely merely gather knowledge about the
gather knowledge
customary
customary forms of of the things
things he is is to build. If
to build. If he is is to
to
become a true cabinetmaker,
cabinetmaker, he makes himself himself answer and
respond
respond above all all to
to the different kinds of
different kinds of wood and to to the
the
shapes
shapes slumbering
slumbering within wood-to wood to wood as as it
it enters into
enters into
dwelling with all
man's dwelling all the hidden riches riches of of its
its nature.
nature. In In
fact,
fact, this
this relatedness to to wood is is what maintains
maintains the the whole
PART
PAI\T II 15
15
craft.
craft. that relatedness,
Without that relatedness, the
the craft will never
craft will never be
be
anything but empty
anything empty busywork
busywork,? any
any occupation
occupation with it
it will
will
be determined exclusively
be exclusively by
by business
business concerns.
concerns. Every
Every
handicraft,
handicraft, all human dealings
all dealings are are constantly
constantly in in that
that
danger. The writing
danger. writing of of poetry
poetry is is no more exempt
exempt from it it
than is
than is thinking.
thinking.
Whether or not a cabinetmaker's apprentice, while he is
cabinetmaker's apprentice, is
learning, will come to
learning, will to respond
respond to to wood and wooden things, things,
depends
depends obviously
obviously on the presence of
the presence teacher who can
of some teacher
make the apprentice
apprentice comprehend.
comprehend.
True. Teaching is
True. Teaching is even more difficult learning. We
difficult than learning.
that; but we rarely
know that; rarely think about it. And why
about it. why isis teach
teach-
ing
ing more difficult
difficult than learning?
learning? Not becausebecause the
the teacher
teacher
must have aa larger
larger store
store of information, and have it
of information, it always
always
ready. Teaching
ready. Teaching is is more difficult learning because
difficult than learning
what teaching
teaching calls
calls for
for isis this:
this to
: to let
let learn.
learn. The real
real teacher,
teacher,
in
in fact,
fact, lets
lets nothing else
nothing else be learned than than-learning.
learning. His con con-
duct, therefore,
duct, therefore, often produces impression that we
produces the impression
properly
properly learn nothing
nothing from him, him, ifif by "learning" we now
by "learning"
suddenly
suddenly understand merely merely the procurement
procurement of of useful in in-
formation. The teacher is is ahead of of his
his apprentices
apprentices in this this
alone, that he has still
alone, still far more to to learn
learn than theythey-he he
has to
to learn
learn toto let
let them learn. teacher must be capable
learn. The teacher capable
of being
of being more teachable
teachable than the apprentices. The teacher
the apprentices.
-is
is far less
less assured of his
ground than those who learn are
his ground
theirs. If
of theirs. If the relation
relation between the the teacher and the taught taught
is
is genuine, therefore,
genuine, therefore, there is is never a a place
place in itit for the
authority
authority of of the know-it-all
know-it-all or the authoritative
authoritative swaysway of the
official. It
official. It still
still isis an exalted matter, then, to become a
matter, then,
teacher--which
teacher which is is something else
something else entirely becoming a
entirely than becoming
famous professor.
professor. That nobody nobody wants any any longer
longer toto become
a teacher today,
today, when all all things
things are downgraded
downgraded and
graded
graded from below (for (for instance,
instance, from business)
business), is,
is pre
pre-
sumably
sumably because the matter is exalted, because of its
is exalted, its alti-
alti
tude.
tude. And presumably
presumably this this disinclination
disinclination is is linked to that
16
16 WHATIS CALLED
WHAT IS THINKING?
CALLED THINKING?
most
most thought-provoking
thought-provoking matter which gives gives us to to think.
think.
We must keep
We keep our our eyes
eyes fixed
fixed firmly
firmly on the the true
true relation
relation
between teacher and taught-if taught if indeed learning learning is is to
to arise
arise
:in
in the course of thesethese lectures.
lectures.
We are
We are trying
trying to to learn
learn thinking.
thinking. Perhaps
Perhaps thinking,
thinking, too,too,
is
is just
just something
something like like building
building a a cabinet.
cabinet. At any any rate,
rate, it
it is
is a
craft,
craft, aa "handicraft." "Craft" literally literally means the strengthstrength
and skill
skill in our hands. The hand is is a
a peculiar
peculiar thing. In the
thing. the
common view, view, the hand is is part
part of our bodily bodily organism.
organism.
But the hand's essence essence can never be determined, determined,, or or ex-ex
plained,
plained,, byby its
its being an organ which can grasp. Apes, too,
being organ grasp. Apes, too,
have organs
organs that
that can grasp,
grasp, but they
they do not have hands.
hands.
The hand is is infinitely different
infinitely different from all all grasping organs-
grasping organs
paws,
paws, claws,
claws, or fangs-different
fangs different by by an abyssabyss ofof essence.
essence.
Only
Only aa being
being who can speak, speak, that is, think,
that is, think, can have hands
and can be handy
handy in in achieving
achieving works of of handicraft.
handicraft.
But the craft
craft of the hand is richer than we commonly
is richer commonly
imagine.
imagine. The hand does not only grasp and catch,
only grasp catch, oror push
push
and pull.
pull. The hand reaches and extends, extends, receives
receives and wel wel-
comes-and
comes and not just just things:
things: the hand extends extends itself,
itself, and
receives its
receives its own welcome in in the hands of of others.
others. The hand
holds. The hand carries.
holds. carries. The hand designs designs and signs, signs,
presumably because man is
presumably is a sign. Two hands fold
sign. fold into
into one,
one,
a gesture
gesture meant to to carry
carry man into into the greatgreat oneness.
oneness. The
hand is is all
all this,
this, and thisthis is
is the true
true handicraft.
handicraft. Everything
Everyth:ing
is rooted here that
is that isis commonly
commonly known as as handicraft,
handicraft, and
commonly we go
commonly go no further.
further. But the the hand's
hand's gestures
gestures run
everywhere through
everywhere through language,
language, in in their
their most perfect
perfect purity
purity
precisely when man speaks
precisely speaks by by being
being silent.
silent. And only only when
man speaks,
speaks, does he think think-not the other
not the other wayway around,
around, as as
metaphysics still
metaphysics still believes. Every motion
believes. Every motion of of the
the hand
hand in in every
every
one of of its
its works carries
carries itself
itself through
through the elementelement of of think
think-
ing, every
ing, every bearing
bearing of the hand bears bears itself
itself in
in that
that element.
element.
All the work of
All the of the hand is is rooted
rooted in in thinking.
thinking. Therefore,
Therefore,
thinking itself
thinking itself is
is man's simplest,
simplest, andand for for that
that reason
reason hard-
hard-
PART II
PAR.T 17
est,
esl, handiwork,
handiwork, if if it
it would be accomplished at
accomplished at its proper
its proper
time.
time.
We must leam
We learn thinking
thinking because our being being ableable to
to think,
think,
and even gifted
gifted forfor it, is still guarantee that
it, is still no guarantee that we are
are
capable
capable of thinking. capable, we must before
thinking. To be capable, before all else
all else
incline
incline toward what addresses itself to
addresses itself thought-and
to thought that
and that
is
is that which of itself
itself gives
gives food for thought. What gives
for thought. gives us us
this gift, the gift
this gift, gift of what must properlyproperly be thoughtthought about,
about,
is
is what we callcall most thought-provoking.
thought-provoking.
Our answer to to the question
question what the most thought-pro thought-pro-
voking
voking thing
thing might
might be is is the assertion: most thought-pro
the assertion : thought-pro-
voking
voking for our thought-provoking
thought-provoking time time is that we are
is that still
are still
not thinking.
thinking.
The reason is is never exclusively
exclusively or or primarily
primarily that that we men
do not sufficiently
sufficiently reach out and turn toward what properly properly
gives
gives food for thought;
thought} the reason is this most thought-
that this
is that thought-
provoking
provoking thingthing tums
turns away
away from us, us, in fact
fact has long
long since
since
tumed
turned away
away from man.
And what withdraws in such aa manner, manner, keeps keeps and develdevel-
ops its own,
ops its own, incomparable
incomparable nearness.
Once we are so related
related and drawn to to what withdraws,
withdraws, we
are drawing
drawing into what withdraws,
withdraws, into into the enigmatic
enigmatic and
therefore mutable nearness of its appeal. Whenever man
its appeal.
is
is properly
properly drawing
drawing that way, way, he is is thinking
thinking--even though
even though
he maymay still
still be far away from what withdraws, even
away withdraws,
though
though the withdrawal may may remain as as veiled
veiled as ever. All
as ever. All
through
through his his life
life and right into his
right into his death,
death, Socrates
Socrates did did
nothing
nothing elseelse than place
place himself into into this
this draft,
draft, this
this cur
cur-
rent,
rent, and maintain himself in it. it. This is is why
why he is the
is the
purest
purest thinker of the West. This is is why
why he wrote nothing. nothing.
For anyone
anyone who begins begins to to write out of of thoughtfulness
thoughtfulness
must inevitably
inevitably be like people who run to
like those people to seek
seek refuge
refuge
from any strong for them. An as
any draft too strong as yet
yet hidden history
history
still
still keeps the secret
keeps secret why
why allall great Western
great Westem thinkers thinkers after
after
Socrates,
Socrates, with all their greatness,
all their greatness, had to to be such fugitives.
fugitives.
Thinking
TMnking has entered into
into literature; literature has
literature and literature
$
decided the fate

fate of Western science which, by
science which, by way
way of the
the
doctrina of the Middle Ages, scientia of modern
Ages, became the scientia modem
times. In this
this form allall the
the sciences leapt from the
sciences have leapt the
philosophy, in a twofold manner. The sciences
womb of philosophy, sciences
come out of of philosophy,
philosophy, because they they have toto part
part with her.
her.
And now that they they are so so apart they can never again,
apart they again, byby
their own power
power as
as sciences,
sciences, make the leap leap back into the
source from whence they they have sprung.
sprung. Henceforth they they
are remanded to to a realm of being only thinking
being where only thinking can
f"md
find them,
them, provided
provided thinking
thinking is is capable
capable of doing
doing what isis its
its
own toto do.
do.
When man is is drawing
drawing intointo what withdraws,
withdraws, he points
points
into
into what withdraws. As we are drawing drawing that way we are
that way are aa
sign,
sign, a pointer.
pointer. But we are pointing
pointing then at at something
something
which has not,
not, not yet,
yet, been transposed
transposed into
into the language
language
of our speech. We are a sign
speech. We sign that is
is not read.
read.
In his
his draft
draft for the hymn "Mnemosyne" (Memory)
hymn "Mnemosyne" (Memory),?
Hoelderlin says
says :
:
"We are a sign is not read,

sign that is read,
We feel
We feel no pain,
pain, we almost have
Lost our tongue
tongue in foreign
foreign lands."
And so,
so, on our way thinking, we hear a word of
way toward thinking, of
poesy.
poesy. But the question
question toto what end and with what right,right,
upon what ground
ground and within what limits, limits, our attempt
attempt to
to
think allows itself
itself to get
get involved in a a dialogue
dialogue with poesy,
poesy,
let alone with the poetry
poetry of this poet-this
this poet question, which
this question,
is
is inescapable, we can discuss
inescapable, after we ourselves
only after
discuss only ourselves have
path of thinking.
taken the path thinking.
LECTURE
LECTURE
II
.....
II
How shall
shall we ever be able
able to
to think about the oft-named re re-
lation between thought
lation thought and poesy,
poesy, so
so long
long asas we do not
know what is is called
called thinking
thinking and what calls thinking,
calls for thinking,
and therefore cannot think about what poesy poesy is? We
is? We mod
mod-
em
ern men presumably slightest notion how
presumably have not the slightest
thoughtfully
thoughtfully the Greeks experienced
experienced their loftylofty poetry,
poetry,
their works of art-no,
art no, not experienced,
experienced, but let let them stand
there in the presence
presence of their radiant appearance.
appearance.
Yet this much mightmight be clear to us light now we are
right now: :
not dragging
dragging Hoelderlin's words into our lecture merely merely
as
as a
a quotation poetic statement which
quotation from the realm of the poetic
will enliven and beautify
beautify the dry thinking. To
progress of thinking.
dry progress
do so
so would be toto debase the poetic
poetic word. Its rests
Its statement rests
on its
its own truth.
truth. This truth is is called beauty.
beauty. Beauty
Beauty is a
is a
fateful
fateful gift
gift of the essence of truth,
truth, and here truth means
the disclosure of what keeps
keeps itself
itself concealed.
concealed- The beautiful
is
is not what pleases,
pleases, but what falls
falls within that fateful giftgift
of truth which comes to to be when that which is is etemally
eternally
non-apparent
non-apparent and
and therefore
therefore invisible attains its
its most radi-
radi
antly
antly apparent
apparent appearance.
appearance. We We are compelled
compelled toto let the
let the
poetic
poetic word
word stand
stand in
in its
its truth,
truth, in beauty.
beauty. And that does not
exclude
exclude but
but on
on the contrary includes that we think the
the contrary
poetic
poetic word.
word.
19
19
When we appropriate
appropriate Hoelderlin's specifically for
Hoelderlin's word specifically for
the realm of of thought,
thought, we must of of course
course bebe careful
careful not
not to
to
equate
equate unthinkingly
unthinkingly Hoelderlin's poetic statement with
Hoelderlin's poetic
what we are are starting
starting out
out to think about and call
to think call "most
thought-provoking."
thought-provoking." What is is stated
stated poetically
poetically, and what
,
is
is stated
stated in
in thought,
thought, are
are never identical;
identical; but there
there are
are times
times
when they
they are
are the
the same--those
same those timestimes when the the gulf
gulf sep
sep-
arating
arating poesy
poesy and thinking
thinking isis aa clean
clean and decisive
decisive cleft.
cleft.
This can occur when poesy poesy is lofty, and thinking
is lofty?
thinking profound.
profound.
Hoelderlin understood the the matter well, as we gather
well, as gather from
the two stanzas
stanzas ofof the
the poem
poem entitled
entitled
Socrates
Socrates and Alcibiades
Alcibiades
"Why,
"Why, holy
holy Socrates,
Socrates, must you always adore
you always adore
This young
young man? Is Is there nothing greater
there nothing greater than
than he?
he?
Why do you
Why you look
look on him
Lovingly,
Lovingly, as
as on a god?"
god?"
(The
(The second stanza gives
gives the answer:)
answer :)
"Who has most deeply

deeply thought, loves what is
thought, loves is most alive,
alive,
Who has looked atat the world,
world, understands youth
youth at its
at its
height,
height,
And wise men in in the end
Often incline
incline to
to beauty."
beauty."
We are concemed
We line "Who has
concerned here with the line has most deeply
deeply
thought,
thought, loves what is alive." It
is most alive." is all
It is all too
too easy
easy in
in this
this
line
line to
to overlook the
the truly
truly telling thus sustaining
telling and thus sustaining words,
words,
verb, we now stress
the verbs. To notice the verb, stress the
the line
line in
in aa
different way that will
way that will sound unfamiliar
unfamiliar to to the
the common
hearer:
hearer :
"Who has most deeply

deeply thought, loves what is
thought, loves is most alive."
alive."
Standing
Standing in the closest
closest vicinity, the two verbs
vicinity, the verbs "thought"
and "loves" form the center
center of the line.
of the line. Inclination
Inclination reposes
reposes
PART II
PART 21
2!
in
in thinking.
thinking. Curious rationalism
rationalism which bases bases love
love onon think
think-
ing!
ing! And an unpleasant
unpleasant kind of of thinking
thinking which is is about
about toto
become sentimental!
sentimental But there
! there isis no trace
trace ofof any
any of of this
this in
in
that
that line.
line. What the line line tells
tells we can
can fathom only only when we
are capable
capable of of thinking.
thinking. And that that isis why
why we ask ask: What is
: is
called thinking--and
called thinking and what does call for
does call for it?
it?
We shallshall never learn what "is "is called"
called" swimming,
swimming, for for
example,
example, or what it it "calls
"calls for,"
7
for/ by by reading
reading aa treatise
treatise on
swimming.
swimming. Only Only the leap leap into
into the riverriver tells
tells us what is is
called swimming.
called swimming. The question question "What is is called
called thinking?"
thinking?"
can never be answered by by proposing
proposing a a definition
defmition of the con
of the con-
cept thinking,
cept thinking, and then diligently explaining what is
diligently explaining is con
con-
tained in in that
that definition.
definition. In what follows., follows, we shall shall not
think about what thinking is. We remain outside
thinking is. outside that
that mere
reflection
reflection which makes thinking thinking its its object.
object. Great thinkers,
thinkers,
first
first Kant and then Hegel, Hegel, have understood the the fruitlessness
fruitlessness
of
of such reflection.
reflection. That is why they
is why they had to to attempt
attempt to to reflect
reflect
their way
way out of such reflection.reflection. How far far they
they got,got, and
where it it took them,
them, are questions
questions thatthat will give us much to
will give to
think about at at the proper juncture along
proper juncture along our way. way. In the
West,
West, thought
thought about thinking flourished as
thinking has flourished as "logic."
"logic."
Logic
Logic has gathered
gathered special
special knowledge concerning a special
knowledge concerning special
kind of thinking.
thinking. This knowledge concerning logic
knowledge concerning logic has been
made scientifically
scientifically fruitful
fruitful only quite recently,
only quite recently, in in a special
special
science
science that
that calls
calls itself
itself "logistics."
"logistics." It It is
is the
the most specialized
specialized
of all
of all specialized sciences. In many
specialized sciences. places, above all
many places, all inin the
Anglo-Saxon
Anglo-Saxon countries,
countries, logistics
logistics is is today
today considered the
only
only possible
possible form of strict strict philosophy,
philosophy, because its its result
result
and procedures
procedures yield yield an assured profit profit forfor the construction
of
of the
the technological
technological universe.
universe. In America and elsewhere, elsewhere,
logistics
logistics as the only
as the only proper
proper philosophy
philosophy of of the future is is thus
beginning
beginning today today toto seize
seize power
power over spirit. Now that
over the spirit.
logistics is in some suitable
logistics is in suitable way forces with modern
joining forces
way joining
psychology
psychology and psychoanalysis,
psychoanalysis, and with sociology, sociology, the the
power-structure
power-structure of of future philosophy
philosophy is is reaching
reaching perfec-
perfec-
22 WHAT
WHAT CALLED THINKING?
IS CALLED THINKING?
tion.
tion. this conformation
But this conformation is
is in
in no way
way of
of man's
man's making,
making,
or within
or within his power.
Ms power. Rather,
Rather, these
these disciplines
disciplines are
are in
in fateful
fateful
submission to
submission to aa power
power which comes comes from farfar away
away,? and for
for
which the
the Greek words Trot^crts r£xvrl
(poesy) and TEXÎ (tech
'1TOL7JCTL<; (poesy) (tech-
nology) may
nology) may still
still be the
the appropriate
appropriate names,
names, provided
provided they
they
signify for
signify for us
us,? who areare thinking,
thinking, That which givesgives food
for thought.
for thought.

Summary Transition
The Summary
Transition at at the
the end of of Lecture 11 concon-
cerned three
cerned three things: the relatedness of
things: the relatedness
of thinking
thinking to to science
science; 5
the
the relation between teaching
relation between learning; and thinking
teaching and learning; thinking
as aa handicraft.
as handicraft.
We refrain
refrain from repeating
repeating the the three
three points,
points, and will try
will try
instead
instead to to clarify
clarify aa few questions reflections concerning
questions and reflections concerning
that
that transition
transition which have been brought brought up up from various
sides.
sides.
When we decide decide to to look for for the essential
essential nature of of
contemporary
contemporary sciencescience in the essence of of modern technology,
technology,
this
this approach
approach posits
posits science as as something
something in the highest highest
sense
sense worthy
worthy of of thought.
thought. The significance
significance of science is is
ranked higher
higher here than in the traditional views which
see
see inin science
science merely phenomenon of human civilization.
merely a phenomenon civilization.
For the essence
essence ofof technology
technology is is not anything
anything human.
The essence
essence of technology
technology is is above all all not anything
anything tech-
tech
nological.
nological. The essence of technology
technology lies lies in what from the
beginning
beginning and before all all else
else gives
gives food for thought.
thought. It It
might
might then be advisable,
advisable, at at least
least for the time being,being, to talk
and write less less about
about technology,
technology, and give give more thought
thought
to where its
to its essence
essence lies,
lies, so
so that we might might first
first find aa way
way
to it.
it. The essence
essence ofof technology pervades
technology pervades our existence in
aa way
way which
which wewe have
have barely
barely noticed so so far.
far. This is is why
why in
the preceding
preceding lecture,
lecture, precisely
precisely at at a juncture
juncture which almost
demanded aa reference
demanded reference to to the
the technological
technological world,world, we kept
kept
PART II
PART 23
25
silent
silent about
technology. It
about technology. now turns
It now turns out
out that
that the
the demands
made here
made here onon you,
you, the the students,
students, have been excessive
excessive forfor the
the
beginning
beginning of of our
our journey.
journey. We We have called called thinking
thinking the
the
handicraft par
handicraft par excellence.
excellence.
Thinking
Thinking guidesguides and and sustains
sustains every
every gesture
gesture of of the
the hand.
hand.
We were talking
We talking about the the cabinetmaker's
cabinetmaker's craft. craft. ItIt could
could
be objected
objected that
that even the the village
village cabinetmaker
cabinetmaker works works with
with
machines nowadays. It
machines nowadays. It could be pointed
pointed out out that
that today
today
gigantic
gigantic industrial factories
factories have risenrisen alongside
alongside the the crafts.-
craftsr-
men's workshops,
workshops, and have in in fact
fact been there
there for
for quite
quite some
time. Inside the factories,
factories, working
working men pull pull the
the same leverlever
day
day and night
night forfor eight
eight toto ten
ten hours
hours atat aa stretch,
stretchy
and work-
work
ing women push
ing push the same button. button. The point point isis correct.
correct.
But in thisthis case,
case, and in in this
this form,
form, it has not
it has not yet been
yet been
thought
thought out.out. The objection
objection falls
falls flat, because it has heard
flat, because it has heard
only
only half of what the discussion
discussion has has to
to say
say about
about handicraft.
handicraft.
We chose the cabinetmaker's craft
We craft asas our example,
example, as as-
suming
suming it it would not occur to to anybody
anybody that that this
this choice
choice indi
indi-
cated anyany expectation
expectation that the the state
state of
of our planet
planet could
could inin
the foreseeable future,
future, or indeed ever, ever, be changed
changed back into into
rustic idyll.
a rustic idyll. The cabinetmaker's
cabinetmaker's craft craft was proposed
proposed as as an
example for our thinking
example thinking because the the common usage usage ofof the
the
word "craft" is is restricted
restricted to to human activities
activities of of that
that sort.
sort.
However
However--it it was specifically noted
specifically noted that that what maintains
maintains
sustains even this
and sustains this handicraft
handicraft is is not
not the
the mere
mere manipula
manipula-
tion of tools,
tion tools, but the the rrelatedness
elatedness to to wood.
wood. But But where
where in in the
the
manipulations of the industrial
manipulations industrial worker
worker is is there
there any
any related-
related-
ness to
ness to such things
things as as the
the shapes
shapes slumbering
slumbering withinwithin wood?
wood?
This is is the question
question you you were meant meant to to run
run up up against,
against,
though not to
though to stop
stop there.
there. For as as long
long asas wewe raise
raise questions
questions
only in this
only way, we are
this way, are still
still questioning
questioning from from the the stand
stand-
point of
point of the
the familiar
familiar and and previously
previously customary
customary handicraft.
handicraft.
What about
about the lever? What
the lever? What about
about the
the button
button which
which thethe
worker manipulates?
worker manipulates? Levers Levers andand buttons
buttons have have long
long existed
existed
even on
even on the
the workbenches
workbenches of of an
an old-fashioned
old-fashioned craftsman's
craftsman's
24
24 WHAT IS CALLED
WHAT IS THINKING?
GALLED THINKING?
shop.
shop. But
But thethe lever
leYer andand buttons
buttons in in the
the manipulations
manipulations of of the
the
industrial
industrial worker
worker belong
belong to to aa machine. And And where does does thethe
machine,
machine., suchsuch as as aa power
power generator,
generator, belong?
belong? Modern tech- tech
nology
nology is is not
not constituted
constituted by, by, and
and does
does not consist
consist in,in, the
the in-
in
stallation
stallation of of electric
electric motors
motors and and turbines
turbines and similar similar ma- ma
chinery;
chinery; that that sort
sort ofof thing
thing can on the the contrary
contrary be be erected
erected
only
only toto the extent
extent to to which the the essence
essence of of modern technol-technol
ogy
ogy has already
already assumed dominion. Our age age is is not a a tech-
tech
nological
nological age age because it it is
is the
the age
age of the machine;
of the machine it 3
it is
is an
age
age of the machine because it it is
is the technological
technological age. age. But
so
so long
long as as the essence
essence of of technology
technology does does not closely
closely concern
concern
us, in our thought,
us, thought, we shall shall never be able able to to know what the the
machine is. is. We shall
shall not be able able toto tell
tell what it it is
is to
to which
the industrial
industrial worker's
worker's hand is is related.
related. We shall not be able
shall not able
to
to make out what kind of of manual work, work, of of handicraft,
handicraft, these these
manipulations
manipulations are. are. And yet-merely
yet merely to to bebe able
able toto ask
ask such
such
questions, we must already
questions, already have caught caught sight sight of of what is is
commonly
commonly meant by by handicraft in the the light
light of of its
its essential
essential
references. Neither the the industrial
industrial workman nor the the en en-
gineers,
gineers, letlet alone the the factory proprietor and least
factory proprietor least ofof all
all the
the
state,
state, can know at all where modern man "lives"
at all "lives" when he
relatedness or
stands in some relatedness or other
other to the machine and ma
to the ma-
parts. None of
chine parts. of us know as as yet
yet what handicraft
handicraft mod mod-
ern man in the the technological
technological world world must carry carry on, on, must
carry on even if
carry if he is is not
not aa worker
worker in in thethe sense
sense of of the
the
worker at at the machine. Neither Neither HegelHegel nor Marx could could
know it it yet,
yet, nor could they they ask
ask why
why their
their thinking,
thinking, too, too, still
still
had to to move in the the shadow of of the
the essential
essential naturenature of of tech
tech-
nology; and so
nology $ so they
they never achieved
achieved the the freedom
freedom to to grasp
grasp
and adequately
adequately think think about
about this
this nature.
nature. Important
Important as as the
the
economic, social,
economic, social, political,
political, moral,
moral, and and even
even religious
religious ques ques-
tions may be
tions be which
which are are being
being discussed
discussed in in connection
connection with with
technological labor
technological labor or or handicraft,
handicraft, none none of of them
them reachreach to to
the core
the core of of the
the matter.
matter. That That matter
matter keeps
keeps itselfitself hidden
hidden in in
PART II
PART 25
the still
still unthought nature of
unthought the way
of the way inin which anything
anything
that isis under
trader the dominion of technology has
of technology has any
any being
being at at
all.
all. And that such matters matters have remained unthought unthought is is
indeed first
first of allall due to to the fact that
the fact that the
the will
will toto action,
action,
which here means the the will
will to make and be
to mate be effective,
effective, has has
overrun and crushed thought. thought.
Some of us may may recall the statement of
recall of the
the first
first lecture
lecture
that so far man has acted acted too much, and thought
too much, thought too too little.
little.
However,
However., the reason why thought has
why thought has failed
failed toto appear
appear is is
not only,
only, and not primarily,
primarily, that that man has has cultivated
cultivated
thought
thought too little,
little, but because
because what is is to
to be
be thought
thought about,
about,
what properly
properly gives
gives food for thought, has
for thought, has long
long been with with-
drawing.
drawing. Because this this withdrawal prevails,
prevails, that
that for
for which
the craft of technological
technological manipulation reaches out
manipulation reaches out remains
hidden. This withdrawal is is what properly gives food
properly gives food for for
thought,
thought, what is is most thought-provoking. Perhaps we no
thought-provoking. Perhaps no-
tice
tice now more readily readily that this most thought-provoking
that this thought-provoking
thing,
thing, in which the essence essence of modem technology
of modern technology also keeps
also keeps
itself hidden,
itself hidden, appeals
appeals to to us constantly everywhere; in
constantly and everywhere 9
in-
deed, what is
deed, is most thought-provoking is
thought-provoking is even closer closer to to us
than the most palpable
palpable closeness
closeness of of our everyday
everyday handiwork
-andand yetyet it
it withdraws. Hence our need and necessity first
necessity first
of all
all to
to hear the appeal
appeal of what is is most thought-provoking.
thought-provoking.
But if if we are to perceive what gives
to perceive gives usus food for thought, we
for thought,
must for our part part get
get underway
underway to to learn
learn linking.
thinking.
Whether,
Whether, by by way
way of of this
this learning though never by
learning though by means
of it,
it, we shall attain
shall attain relatedness
relatedness to to what is is most thought-
thought-
provoking,
provoking, is is something altogether out of
something altogether of the hands of of
those who practice
practice the craftcraft of thinking.
thinking.
What we can do in our present case, or anyway
present case, anyway can learn,learn,
is
is to
to listen
listen closely.
closely. To learn listening, too, is
listening, too, the common
is the
concern of teacher. No one is
of student and teacher. is to
to be blamed,
blamed,
then,
then, if if he is
is not yet capable
yet capable of of listening.
listening. But by by the same
token you you must concede that the teacher's
that the teacher's attempt
attempt may may go go
26
26 WHAT
WHAT IS
IS CALLED THINKING?
CALLED THINKING?
wrong
wrong and and that,
that, where
where he he happens
happens not to to go
go wrong,
wrong, he
must often resignresign himself to to the
the fact
fact that
that he can not lay lay
before
before you
you inin each instance all all that
that should be stated.
stated.
On thethe other hand,
hand, you will make close
you will close listening
listening essen-
essen
tially
tially easier
easier for
for yourselves
yourselves if if you will rid
you will rid yourselves
yourselves in in
time of of aa habit
habit which II shall shall call
call "one-track thinking."
thinking."
The dominion of this
of this manner of
of perception is so vast
perception is so vast today
today
that our eyes
eyes can barely encompass
barely encompass it.
it. The expression
expression "one-
track" has been chosen on purpose. purpose. Track has to to do with
rails,
rails, and rails
rails with technology.
technology. We We would be making making
matters tootoo easy
easy for
for ourselves
ourselves if
if we simply
simply took the view
that the dominion of one-track thinking thinking has grown grown out of of
human laziness.
laziness. This one-track thinking,thinking, which is becom-
is becom
ing
ing ever more widespread
widespread in various shapes, shapes, is is one of of those
those
unsuspected and inconspicuous
unsuspected inconspicuous forms,forms, mentioned earlier, earlier,
on which the essence
.,in essence of of technology
technology assumesassumes dominion
dominion-
because that
that essence wills
wills and therefore needs absolute absolute uni-uni-
vocity.
vocity.
In the preceding
preceding lecture it it was said
said that
that Socrates was the the
purest thinker of the West,
purest West, while those those who followed
followed had
to run for shelter.
to shelter. There comes the the horrified
horrified retort:
retort: "But
what about Plato, Augustine, Thomas Aquinas,
Plato, Augustine, Aquinas, Leibniz,
Leibniz,
Kant, Nietzsche? Dare we reduce these
Kant, these thinkers
thinkers so so much in in
comparison
comparison with Socrates?" But our questioner questioner has has failed
failed
to hear what was also
to also said
said: all
:all great
great Western thinkersthinkers after
after
Socrates "with all
Socrates all their
their greatness."
greatness." Someone,
Someone, then, then, could
could
still be the purest
still purest thinker without being being one of of the
the greatest.
greatest.
That would give give us here much to to think about.about. For that that
reason, the remark about Socrates
reason, Socrates beganbegan with the the words:
words:
"An as as yet
yet hidden history
history still
still keeps
keeps the the secret
secret why why allall
great thinkers after
great after Socrates,
Socrates, with all all their
their greatness
greatness . . ..""
. .
We
We hear something
something of of Socrates,
Socrates, the the purest
purest thinker
thinker--we we
fail to
fail to hear the rest,
rest, and then alongalong thethe oneone track
track of of some
some-
thing half
thing -heard we travel
half-heard travel on right
right into
into being
being horrified
horrified at at
such one-sidedly
such one-sidedly dogmatic
dogmatic statements.
statements. Things Things are are similar
similar
PART II
PART 27
with the conclusion of the lecture. There we said

the second lecture.
that our way
way remains outside that mere reflection
outside that r.eflection which
makes
mates thinking
thinking its
its object.
object. How can anyone
anyone make such aa
statement after he has for two solid
solid hours spoken
spoken of noth
noth-
ing
ing else
else but thinking?
thinking? However,
However, toto reflect
reflect on thinking^
thinking, and
to
to trace
trace thinking
thinking in thought,
thought^ are perhaps
perhaps not altogether
altogether the
We must give
same. We give thought
thought to reflection means.
to what reflection
LECTURE
III
.III
._..
When we attempt to learn what is

attempt to is called thinking and what
called thinking
calls for
calls for thinking,
thinking, are we not getting
getting lostlost in the reflection
reflection
that
that thinks
thinks on thinking?
thinking? Yet all all along
along our way way a steady
steady
light
light isis cast
cast on thinking.
thinking. This light, light, however,
however, is is not intro
intro-
duced by by the
the lamp
lamp of of reflection.
reflection. It It issues
issues from thinking
thinking
itself, and only
itself, only from there. Thinking Thinking has this this enigmatic
enigmatic
property, that it
property, it itself
itself is
is brought
brought to its own light
to its light-though
though
only
only if
if and only
only as long
long as it
it is
is thinking,
thinking, and keeps
keeps clear
persisting in ratiocination a
of persisting bout ratio.
about
Thinking it answers to what is
thinking when it is most
thought-provoking. In our thought-provoking

thought-provoking. thought-provoking time, time, what
is
is most thought-provoking
thought-provoking shows itself itself in the fact that we
are still
still not thinking.
thinking. For the moment, moment, what this this sentence
says
says is
is no more than an assertion. It It has the form of a statestate
ment,
ment, and thisthis statement we shall now deal with. We We shall
shall
for
for now discuss
discuss two points
points : first
: first the tone of the assertion,
assertion,
and then its its character as as a
a statement.
The assertion claims claims:: What is is most thought-provoking
thought-provoking
in
in our thought-provoking
thought-provoking time time isis that we are stillstill not think-
think
ing.
ing.
What we
What we call
call thought-provoking
thought-provoking in the condition of
someone
someone gravely
gravely ill,
ill, for
for example,
example, is is that itit gives us cause for
gives
worry. We
worry. We call thought-provoking
call thought-provoking what is is dark,
dark, threat-
28
28
PAKT II
PART 29
ening,
ening, and gloomy,
gloomy, and generally
generally what is adverse. When
is adverse. 'Vhen
we say
say "thought-provoking,"
"thought-provoking/ we usually
7
usually have in in mind
immediately
immediately something
something injurious,
injurious,, that that is,is, negative.
negative. Ac Ac-
cordingly,
cordingly,, a statement that speaks speaks of of aa thought-provoking
thought-provoking
time,
time, and even of what is is most thought-provoking in
thought-provoking in it, it,
is
is from the start
start tuned inin a
a negative
negative key. key. It has in
It has in view onlyonly
the adverse and somber traits traits ofof the age. It
the age. sticks exclusively
It sticks exclusively
to those phenomena
to phenomena that that are goodgood forfor nothing
nothing and promote promote
every
every form of of nothingness-the phenomena. And
nihilistic phenomena.
nothingness the nihilistic
it
it necessarily
necessarily assumes that at the core
at the core ofof those
those phenomena
phenomena
there isis a lack-according
lack according to to our proposition,
proposition, lack lack of of
thought.
thought.
This tune is is familiar
familiar to
to us all
all ad nauseam from the the stand
stand-
ard appraisals
appraisals of the present
present age.age. A generation
generation ago ago itit was
"The Decline of of the West." Today Today we speak speak of of "loss
"loss ofof
center." People
People everywhere
everywhere trace record the
trace and record the decay
decay, the
7
the
destruction,
destruction, the imminent annihilation
annihilation of of the world. We
are surrounded by by a special
special breed of of reportorial
reportorial novelsnovels that
that
do nothing
nothing but wallow in such deterioration
deterioration and depression.
depression.
On the one hand,hand, that sort
sort of literature
literature is is much easiereasier to to
produce than to
produce to say
say something
something that that isis essential
essential and truly truly
thought out;
thought out but on the other hand it
5
it is
is already
already getting
getting tiretire-
some. The world,
world, men find,
find, is just out of
is not just joint but tum
of joint tum-
bling
bling away
away into the nothingness
into the nothingness of of absurdity.
absurdity. Nietzsche,
Nietzsche,
who from his his supreme
supreme peak
peak saw far ahead of of it
it all, as early
all, as early
as
as the eighteen-eighties
eighteen-eighties had for for itit the simple,
simple, because
thoughtful,
thoughtful, words: "The wasteland grows." grows." It It means,
means, the
devastation is is growing wider. Devastation is
growing is more than
destruction.
destruction. Devastation is is more unearthly
unearthly than destruction.
destruction.
Destruction onlyonly sweeps
sweeps aside
aside allall that
that has grown
grown up up oror been
built
built up
up soso far;
far; but devastation blocks blocks allall future growth growth
and prevents
prevents all all building.
building. Devastation is is more unearthly
unearthly
than mere destruction.
destruction. Mere destruction
destruction sweepssweeps asideaside all all
things including
things including even nothingness,
nothingness, while devastation devastation on
the
the contrary
contrary establishes
establishes and spreads everything that blocks
spreads everything blocks
30
IS CALLED
WHAT IS THINKING?
and
and prevents.
prevents. The The African
African Sahara
Sahara is is only
only oneone kind
kind ofof waste-
waste
land.
land. TheThe devastation
devastation of of the
the earth
earth can easily
easily go hand in
go hand in
hand
hand with
with aa guaranteed
guaranteed supreme
supreme living
living standard for for man,
man,
and
and just
just as
as easily
easily with
with the
the organized
organized establishment
establishment of
of aa
uniform
uniform statestate of
of happiness
happiness for for all
all men. Devastation
Devastation can be be
the
the same
same as as both,
both, and can can haunt us everywhere
everywhere in in the
the most
unearthly
unearthly way-by
way by keeping
keeping itself
itself hidden. Devastation
Devastation does does
not
not just
just mean
mean aa slowslow sinking
sinking intointo the
the sands.
sands. Devastation
Devastation
is
is the high-velocity
high- velocity expulsion
expulsion of of Mnemosyne.
Mnemosyne. The words, words,
"the wasteland grows," grows/' come from another realm than
than
the current appraisals
appraisals ofof our age.
age. Nietzsche
Nietzsche said said "the
"the waste-
waste
land grows"
grows" nearly
nearly three quarters
quarters of of a
a century
century ago.ago. And
he added,
added, "Woe to to him who hides wastelands within."
hides wastelands within."
Now it it seems as as though
though our assertion,
assertion, that
that "what is is most
thought-provoking
thought-provoking in our thought-provoking
thought-provoking time time isis that
that we
are still
still not thinking," were part of
thinking," part of thethe same chorus chorus of of
voices that disparage
disparage modern Europe Europe as as sick,
sick, and our age age asas
on the decline.
decline.
Let us listen
listen more closely! assertion says,
closely! The assertion says, what is is
thought-provoking is
most thought-provoking is that we are are still
still not thinking.
thinking.
The assertion says says neither that that we are are no longer
longer thinking,
thinking,
nor does it it say
say roundly
roundly thatthat we areare not
not thinking
thinking at at all.
all. The
"still not,"
words "still not," spoken
spoken thoughtfully,
thoughtfully, suggest
suggest that
that we are are
already on our way
already way toward thinking,
thinking, presumably
presumably from a
great distance,
great distance, not only only on our way way toward
toward thinking
thinking as as aa
conduct some day day toto be practiced,
practiced, but but on our our way within
way within
thinking, on the way
thinking, way of thinking.
thinking.
Our assertion,
assertion, then,
then, casts
casts a bright
bright rayray of of hope
hope into
into that
that
obfuscation which seems not not only
only to to oppress
oppress the the world
world
from somewhere,
somewhere, but but which men are are almost
almost dragging
dragging in in byby
force. It
force. It is
is true
true that our assertion
assertion calls
calls the
the present
present ageage thethe
thought-provoking age.
thought-provoking age. What
'What we we have
have in in mind
mind withwith this
this
word
word-and and without
without any any disparaging
disparaging overtones
overtones-is that
is that
which
which gives
gives us us food
food for
for thought,
thought, which
which is is what
what wants
wants to to be
be
thought about. What
thought about. 'What isis thought-provoking,
thought-provoking, so so understood,
understood,
PART II
PART 31
51
need in in no wayway be what causes causes us us worry

worry or or even perturbs
perturbs
us.
us. Joyful
Joyful things,
things, too,too, and beautiful mysterious and
beautiful and mysterious
gracious
gracious things
things give
give us food for thought. These things
for thought. things maymay
even be more thought-provoking
even thought-provoking than all all the
the rest
rest which
we otherwise,
otherwise, and usually usually without much thought, thought, call call
"thought-provoking."
"thought-provoking. These things
7'
things willwill give
give us us food
food forfor
thought,
thought, if if only
only we do not reject reject the
the gift
gift byby regarding
regarding
everything
everything that is joyful, beautiful,
is joyful, gracious as
beautiful, and gracious the
as the
kind of of thing
thing which should be left left to
to feeling
feeling and experience,
experience,
and kept
kept out of of the
the winds of thought. Only
of thought. after we have
Only after
let
let ourselves
ourselves become involved involved with the the mysterious
mysterious and gra gra-
cious
cious things
things asas those which properlyproperly givegive food for for thought,
thought,
only
only then can we take thought thought alsoalso of
of how we shouldshould regard
regard
the
the malice of of evil.
evil.
What is is most thought-provoking, then,

Nought-provoking, then, could could be somesome-
thing
thing lofty,
lofty, perhaps
perhaps even the highest thing
the highest thing there
there isis for
for man,
man,
provided
provided man still still is
is the being who is
being is insofar as as he thinks,
thinks,
thinks in that thought
thought appeals
appeals to to him because his his essential
essential
nature consists
consists in memory,
memory, the gathering thought. And
gathering of thought.
what is thought-provoking especially when it
is most thought-provoking-especially it is
is
man's highest
highest concern-may
concern may well well be alsoalsq what is is most
dangerous.
dangerous. Or do we imagine imagine that that a man could even in
small waysways encounter the essence of of truth,
truth, the essence of
beauty,
beauty, the essence
essence of of grace--without
grace danger?
without danger?
Therefore,
Therefore, when our assertion speaks of
assertion speaks of the
the thought-
thought-
provoking
provoking age age and of what is thought-provoking in
is most thought-provoking
it, it is in no way
it, it is
way tuned to to a key
key ofof melancholy
melancholy and despair. despair.
It
It is
is not drifting blindly toward the
drifting blindly the worst.
worst. It It is
is not pessi
pessi-
mistic. But neither
mistic. neither is is the assertion optimistic. It
assertion optimistic. It does
does not
intend to to offer
offer quick
quick comfort through through artificially
artificially hopeful
hopeful
prospects
prospects of of the best.
best. But what alternative
alternative remains? In In-
decision
decision between the two? Indifference? These least least of all*
all.
For allall indecision
indecision always
always feeds only on those
feeds only those matters be be-
tween which it it remains undecided. Even the man who be be-
lieves
lieves his judgments to
his judgments beyond pessimism
to be beyond pessimism and optimismoptimism
32 WHAT
WHAT IS CALL ED THINKING?
CALLED THI NX.ING?
(or
(or on their
their hither side),
side) still always takes
still always
?
takes his
his bearings
bearings
from optimism
optimism and pessimism,
pessimism, and guidesguides Mmself
himself byby aa
mere variant of of indifference. pessimism and optimism
indifference. But pessimism optimism
both,
both together
? together with the indifference
indifference and its its variants
variants which
they
they support,
support, stem from a a peculiar relatedness of
peculiar relatedness of man to to
what we call call history.
Mstory, This relatedness
relatedness is is difficult
difficult to
to grasp
grasp
in
in its
its peculiarity-not
peculiarity not because it it is
is situated
situated far away,
away, but
because it it is by now habitual
is by habitual toto us.
us. Our assertion,
assertion, too,
too,
patently
patently stems
stems from a a relatedness
relatedness toto the
the history
history and situa
situa-
tion
tion ofof man. What is is the
the nature of of that
that relatedness?
relatedness? This
brings
brings us us to
to the
the second point about our assertion
point about assertion toto which
we must givegive attention.
attention.
Summary
After our transitional
transitional remarks on science, science, on learning,
learning, and
on hand and handicraft,
handicraft^ we returned to to our theme. A A ref
ref-
erence toto one-track thinking provided transition. One-
thinking provided the transition.
track thinking
thinking is is something else
something else than mere one-sided one-sided
thinking;
thinking; it it has a greater reach and a loftier
greater loftier origin.
origin. In the
the
present
present discourse concerning
concerning one-sided and one-trackone-track think
think-
ing,
ing, the word "thinking"
"thinking" means as as much as as "having
"having views."
views."
One might
might say,
say, for instance: "I think it it will
will snow to to-
night."
night." But he who speaks speaks that way way isis not
not thinking,
thinking, he
just something. We must be very
just has views on something. very careful,
careful,
however,
however, not to regard
regard this
this "viewing"
"viewing" as
as insignificant.
insignificant. AllAll
our daily
daily life
life and allall we do moves within what we have in in
view,
view, and necessarily
necessarily so. so. Even thethe sciences stay within
sciences stay within it.it.
And how is is it
it one-sided? Is Is it not one of
it not of science's
science's highest
highest
principles
principles to explore
explore itsits objects
objects from as as many
many sides
sides as
as possi
possi-
ble, even from all
ble, all sides?
sides? Where is is the one-sidedness
one-sidedness in that?
in that?
It
It lies
lies precisely
precisely in the spheresphere of scientific
scientific exploration.
exploration. HisHis-
torical
torical science may
may thoroughly explore aa period,
thoroughly explore period, for
for inin-
stance,
stance, inin every
every possible
possible respect, yet never
respect, and yet never explore
explore what
history is. It
history is. It cannot do so, scientifically. By way of
so, scientifically. By way of history.
history,
PART
PART II 53
55
a man will
will never find
find out
out what history
history is
is;5 no more than a
mathematician can show by by way
way of of mathematics
mathematics-by by
means of his
his science,
science, that
that is,
is, and ultimately
ultimately by by mathemati
mathemati-
cal formulae
cal formulatr-what
what mathematics is. is. The essence
essence of
of their
their
sphertr-history,
sphere history, art, poetry,
art, poetry,
language, nature,
language, nature, man,
man, God
-remains inaccessible to
remains inaccessible to the sciences. At the
the sciences. the same time,
time,
however, the
however, the sciences
sciences would constantly
constantly fall
fall into
into the
the void
void if
if
they did
they did not operate
operate within these spheres. The essence
these spheres. essence ofof
the spheres
the spheres II have named is is the concern
concern of
of thinking.
thinking. As thethe
sciences qua
sciences qua sciences
sciences have no access
access to
to this
this concern,
concern, itit must
be said that they
said that are not thinking.
they are this is
tMnking. Once this is put
put in
in words,
words,
it tends to
it tends to sound at first as
at first as though thinking fancied
though thinking fancied itself
itself
superior to
superior to the
the sciences.
sciences. Such arrogance,
arrogance, if
if and where it
it
exists, unjustified;$ thinking
exists, would be unjustified always knows essen
thinking always essen-
tially less
tially less than the
the sciences precisely because
sciences precisely because it it operates
operates
where it it could
could think
think the
the essence
essence ofof history,
history, art,
art, nature,
nature,
language--and
language and yet yet is
is still
still not capable
capable ofof it.
it. The sciences
sciences
are fully
fully entitled
entitled to their name,
to their name, which means fields fields of
knowledge,
knowledge, because they they have infinitely
infinitely more knowledge
knowledge
than thinking
thinking does.
does. And yet yet there isis another side
side in every
every
science
science which that that science
science as as such can never reach: the
essential
essential nature and origin origin of its its sphere,
sphere, the essence and
essential
essential origin
origin of the manner of of knowing
knowing which it it culti
culti-
vates, and other things
vates, besides. The sciences
things besides. sciences remain of
necessity
necessity on the one side. side. In this
this sense
sense they
they are one-sided,
one-sided,
but in
in such a way way that
that the other side side nonetheless always
always
appears
appears as well. The sciences'
as well. retains its own
one-sidedness retains
sciences' one-sidedness its
many-sidedness.
many-sidedness. But that many-sidedness
many-sidedness may may expand
expand to
such proportions
proportions thatthat the one-sidedness on which it it is
is based
no longer
longer catches
catches our eye.eye. And when man no longer longer sees
the
the one side
side as
as one side,
side, he has lost lost sight
sight of the other side
as well. What sets
as well. sets the two sidessides apart,
apart, what lieslies between
them,
them, isis covered
covered up,up, so
so toto speak. Everything is
speak. Everything is leveled to
level. Our minds hold views on all

one level. everything, and
all and everything,
view all
all things
things inin the identical
identical way.
way. Today
Today every
every news-
54 WHAT
WHAT IS CALLED
IS CALL THINKING?
ED THINKING?
paper,
paper, every
every illustrated
illustrated magazine,
magazine, and every every radio
radio program
program
offers all things in
offers all things in thethe identical
identical way way to to uniform views. views. The
subjects
subjects of science
science and the the concern of thinking are dealt
of thinking dealt
with in the identical
identical manner. However, However, it it would be a a
disastrous error
disastrous error forfor us
us toto take
take thethe view that that thethe mention
of
of such phenomena
phenomena merely merely served
served to to characterize
characterize or even
criticize
criticize our present
present age.age. We shouldshould fallfall victim to to a a dis-
dis
astrous
astrous self-deception
self-deception if if we were to to take the view that that a a
haughty
haughty contempt
contempt is is all
all that
that is
is needed to to let us escape
let us escape from
the imperceptible
imperceptible power power of of the uniformly one-sided view.
unifonnly one-sided view.
On the contrary,
contrary, the the point
point is is to
to discern
discern what weird, weird, unun-
earthly
earthly things
things are here in
are here in the making.
making. The one-sided view, view,
which nowhere pays pays attention
attention any any longer
longer to to the essence
essence of of
things,
things, has puffed
puffed itself
itself upup into
into an all-sidedness
all-sidedness which in in
turn isis masked so so as
as to
to look
look harmless and natural. natural. But this this
all-sided
all-sided view which deals deals in all and everything with equal
in all everything equal
uniformity
uniformity and mindlessness,
mindlessness, is is only
only a preparation
preparation for for
what is is really going on. For it
really going is only
it is only on the plane plane ofof the
the
one-sided uniform view that that one-track
one-track thinking
thinking takes takes its
its
start.
start. It
It reduces everything to
everything to a a univocity
univocity of of concepts
concepts and
specifications
specifications the precision
precision of which not only only corresponds
corresponds to, to,
but has the same essential
essential origin
origin as,as, the
the precision
precision of of techno
techno-
logical process. For the moment,
logical process. moment, we need to to keep
keep inin mind
only
only that
that one-track thinking
thinking is is not co-extensive
co-extensive with the the
one-sided view,view, but rather is is building on it
building it even while
transforming
transforming it. it. A
A symptom,
symptom, at at first
first sight
sight quite
quite superficial,
superficial,
of
of the growing power
the growing power of one-track thinking thinking is is the
the increase
increase
everywhere
everywhere of designations consisting of
designations consisting of abbreviations
abbreviations of of
words, or combinations of their
words, initials. Presumably
their initials. Presumably no
one here has ever given given serious thought to
serious thought to what has has already
already
come to pass when you,
to pass you, instead
instead of University, simply
of University, simply say
say
"U" that is
"U." "U"-that is like
like "movie." True, True, thethe moving
moving picture
picture
theater continues
continues to to be different
different from the the academy
academy of of the
the
sciences.
sciences. Still,
designation "U" is
Still, the designation is not accidental,
accidental, let let
alone harmless. It It may
may even be in in order
order that
that youyou go in and
go in
PART II
PAB.T 35
55
out of of the "U" and study study "phy.

"phy. sci"sci." But the the question
remains what kind of of order is heralded here
is heralded here in in the
the spread
spread-
ing
ing ofof this
this kind of language. Perhaps it
language. Perhaps it is
is an order into into
which we are drawn, drawn, and to to which we are are abandoned,
abandoned, by by
That which withdraws from us. us.
And that
that is
is what we call call most thought-provoking.
thought-provoking. Ac Ac-
cording
cording to to our assertion,
assertion., itit expresses itself in
expresses itself that we are
in that are
still
still not thinking.
thinking.
The assertion
assertion seems to to be tuned in in aa negative
negative and pes pes-
simistic
simistic key.
key. However,
However, "thought-provoking"
"thought-provoking" here here means
what gives
gives food for thought. thought-provoking is
thought. Most thought-provoking is
not only
only what gives
gives most food for for thought,
thought, in in tie
the sense that
sense that
it makes the greatest demands on our thinking; most
it greatest thinking;
thought-provoking
thought-provoking is is what inherently gathers and keeps
inherently gathers keeps
within itself
itself the greatest
greatest riches
riches of of what is is thought-worthy
thought-worthy
and memorable. Our assertion assertion sayssays that
that we are are still
still not
thinking.
thinking. This "still"still not" contains a a peculiar
peculiar reference to to
something
something stillstill to come, of which we absolutely
to come, absolutely do not
know whether it it will
will come to us. This "still
to us. "still not" is is of
of aa
unique
unique kind,
kind, which refuses to equated with other kinds.
to be equated kinds.
For example,
example, we can say, say, around midnight,
midnight, that that the sun
has still
still not come up. We can say
up. We say thethe same thingthing in in the
early
early dawn. The "still "still not" in each case case is
is different.
different. But,
But, it
it
will
will be objected,
objected, it it is
is different
different here only only regarding
regarding the time
span,
span, the number of of hours that pass between midnight
that pass midnight and
dawn;
dawn, while the daily daily rising
rising of of the
the sun is is certain.
certain. Certain
in what sense?
sense? Perchance in the scientific scientific sense?
sense? But since
Copernicus, science no longer
Copernicus, science recognizes sunrises
longer recognizes sunrises and sun sun-
sets.
sets. Scientifically,
Scientifically, it it has been unequivocally
unequivocally established
established
that these things
that things are illusions
illusions of of the
the senses.
senses. By By the common
assumption
assumption of of the customary
customary view, this "still
view, this "still not" concern
concern-
ing
ing the rising
rising sun retains
retains its
its truth at at midnight
midnight and at at dawn
dawn; j
but this
this truth can never be scientifically established, for the
scientifically established,
simple
simple reason that that the daily
daily morning expectation of the sun
morning expectation
is
is of a nature thatthat has no room for for scientific proofs. When
scientific proofs.
IS CALLED THINKING?
WHAT IS
we wait forfor the sun to to rise,

rise, we never do it it on the strength
strength
of scientific
scientific insight.
insight. It
It will
will be objected
objected that men have be-
be
come habituated to to the regularity
regularity of these these phenomena.
phenomena. As
though
though the habitual went without saying, saying, as as though
though it it were
understood! As though though there could be anything anything habitual
without habitation!
habitation! As thoughthough we had ever given given thought
thought
to habitation!
habitation Now ifI if even the coming
coming and going
going of the sun
is
is such a rare and curious matter for us, how much more
for us,
mysterious will matters be in
mysterious in that realm where that which
thought withdraws from man and,
must be thought and, at
at the same
time,
time, in its
its withdrawal,
withdrawal., comes to to him.
This,
This, and this
this alone,
alone, is why we say,
is why then, that what gives
say, then, gives
us most food for thought
thought is is that we are are still
still not thinking.
thinking.
This means : insofar as
: as we are at all,? we are already
at all already in in a
relatedness to to what gives
gives food for for thought.
thought. Even so, so, in
in our
thinking
thinking we have still still not come to to what is is most thought-
thought-
provoking.
provoking. Nor can we know by ourselves whether we will
by ourselves will
get there. Accordingly,
get there. Accordingly, our assertion assertion is is not optimistic
optimistic
either;
either j nor does it it hang
hang suspended indecision between
suspended in indecision
pessimism
pessimism and optimism,
optimism, for then it it would have to to reckon
with both and thereby
thereby basically adopt their
basically adopt their ways
ways of reckreck-
oning.
oning.
The key
key in which our assertion is is tuned cannot,
cannot, then,
then, be
determined simplysimply like
like that of an ordinary ordinary statement.
statement.
Therefore,
Therefore, it it will be well to give thought not only to
give thought only to thethe
key
key note of our assertion,
assertion, but also also to to its
its character
character as as a
statement.
LECTURE
LECTURE
IV
·-·
First,
First, the tone of our assertion
assertion is is inin no way way negative,,
negative 7
though
though itit may
may easily
easily seem so to an inattentive
so to inattentive listener
listener or
reader. In general,
general, the proposition
proposition does does not express
express aa dis dis-
paraging
paraging attitude
attitude of anyany sort. second point
sort. The second point concerns
the question
question whether the assertion
assertion isis a statement.
statement. The way way
in which our assertion speaks adequately indicated
speaks can be adequately
only
only when we are able to give thought to
give thought to what the assertion
assertion
actually
actually says.
says. That possibility will at
possibility will at best
best present
present itself
itself at
at
the end of our lectures,
lectures, or longlong afterward. It is much more
It is
likely
likely that this
this most fortunate eventuality
eventuality will will still
still not
come about. This is why we must even now pay

is why pay attention
attention
to the question
question posed
posed for us by assertion when we con
by the assertion con-
sider the way
way in which it it speaks,
speaks, or how it it speaks.
speaks. By
By "way/*
"way,,.
"how," we mean something
or "how," something other than manner or mode.
"Way"
"Way" here means melody,melody, the ring ring and tone,tone, which is is not
just
just a matter of how the sayingsaying sounds. The way way or how of
the saying
saying is
is the tone from which and to to which what is is said
said
is We suggest,
is attuned. We
suggest, then, that the two questions
then, that questions-concon
ceming
cerning the "tone" of our assertion, concerning its
assertion, and concerning its
nature as
as a statement-hang
statement hang together. together.
One can hardly deny,
hardly deny, it
it seems, assertion, which
seems, that the assertion,
speaks
speaks of our thought-provoking
thought-provoking time and of of what in it it is
is
most thought-provoking,
thought-provoking, is is a judgment on the present
judgment present age.
age.
37
57
38
58 WHAT GALLED THINKING?
How do things
things stand
stand with such judgments
judgments on the present? present?
They
They describe
describe thethe age
age as
as on thethe decline,
decline, for for instance,
instance, as as
sick, decaying,
sick, decaying, stricken
stricken with "loss"loss of center." What is
of center." is de
de-
cisive about such judgments,
cisive however, is
judgments, however, is not thatthat they
they
evaluate
evaluate everything
everything negatively,
negatively, but that that they
they evaluate at at
all.
all. They
They determine
detemiine the the value,
value, soso to
to speak
speak the the price
price range
range
into
into which the the age
age belongs.
belongs. Such appraisals
appraisals are are considered
considered
indispensable, but
indispensable, but also unavoidable. Above all,
also unavoidable. they im
all, they im-
mediately
mediately create
create the
the impression
impression of of being
being in in the
the right.
right. Thus
they
they promptly
promptly win the the approval
approval of of the
the many,
many, at at least
least for
for
whatever time is is allotted
allotted to judgments. That time now
to such judgments.
grows
grows steadily shorter. If
steadily shorter. If people today tend once again
people today again to to
be more in in agreement
agreement with Spengler's
Spengler's proposition
proposition about about
the
the decline
decline ofof the
the West,
West, itit is
is (along with various
(along various superficial
superficial
reasons)
reasons) because
because Spengler's
Spengler's proposition
proposition is is only
only the
the nega
nega-
tive,
tive, though
though correct,
correct, consequence
consequence of of Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's words:
"The wasteland grows." grows.*' We We emphasized
emphasized that these are are
words issuing
issuing from thought.
thought. They
They areare true
true words.
Still, it
Still, it appears
appears that judgments
judgments on the age age which issue issue
from other sources
sources are are just as much in
just as in the right.
right. Indeed
they
they are,
are, in
in that
that they
they areare correct,
correct, since
since theythey take their their
direction
direction from,
from, and conform to, facts which can be brought
to, facts brought
in byby the carload for documentation,
documentation, and can be docu docu-
mented by by adroitly
adroitly selected quotations from leamed
selected quotations learned au au-
thors.
thors. An idea is is called correct when it
called correct it conforms to to its
its
object. Such correctness in the forming
object. forming of of an idea
idea has longlong
since been equated
equated with truth-that
truth is, we determine the
that is, the
nature of truth by by the conformity
conformity of the idea. If
the idea. If I I say:
say:
"Today
"Today is is Friday,"
Friday," the statement is is correct,
correct, because it it
directs
directs and conforms the idea idea to the sequence
to the sequence of of days
days in in the
the
week,
week, and arrives
arrives at at this
this day. judge is
day. To judge is to
to form correct
correct
ideas. When we judge something as when we say:
judge something-as say "That
:
tree isis blossoming"-our

blossoming" our idea must maintain the the direction
direction
toward the object,
object, the blossoming tree. But this
blossoming tree. this mainte
mainte-
nance of direction is is constantly beset
constantly beset by by the
the possibility
possibility thatthat
PART II
PAl\.T 59
we do not attainattain the direction,

direction, or else we lose
or else it. The idea
lose it. idea
does
does not thereby
thereby become undirected,
undirected., butbut incorrect
incorrect with ref ref-
erence
erence to to the object.
object. Putting
Putting itit more specifically,
specifically, to to Judge
judge is is
to
to form ideasideas correctly,
correctly, and therefore
therefore also also possibly
possibly incor
incor-
rectly.
rectly. In order now to to show in in what way way our assertion
assertion
about the present
present age age has the nature
nature of statement, we
of aa statement,
must demonstrate more clearly clearly how things
things stand
stand with judg judg-
ments,
ments., that is, is,
with thethe forming
forming of of correct
correct and incorrect
incorrect
ideas.
ideas. As soon as as we think thatthat matter throughthrough properly,
properly,
we areare caught
caught up up in
in this
this question:
question what is
: this anyway
is this anyway-to to
form an idea,idea a representation?
? representation?
Is
Is there anyone
anyone among
among us us who doesdoes not know what it it is
is
to form an idea?
to idea? When we form an idea idea of of something
something--of of
aa text
text ifif we areare philologists,
philologists, a a work of of art if if we are art art
historians,
historians, a a combustion processprocess ifif we are are chemists
chemists-we we
have a representational
representational idea idea of objects. Where do we
those objects.
of those
have those ideas? We We have them in head. We have them
in our head.
in our consciousness. We We have them in soul. We
in our soul. We have
the ideas inside ourselves,
ourselves, these ideas
ideas ofof objects.
objects.
Now it it is
is true that a few centuries ago philosophy
ago philosophy began began
to
to meddle in the matter, matter, and by by now has made it it ques
ques-
tionable whether the ideas inside ourselves
tionable ourselves answer to to any
any
reality
reality at at all
all outside
outside ourselves.
ourselves. Some say yes; others,
say yes; others, no$ no;
still
still others saysay that the matter cannot be decided anyway, anyway,
all
all one can say say is that the world-that
is that world that is, is, here,
here, the totality
totality
of what is is real-is
real is there insofar as as we have an idea idea ofof it.
it.
"The world is is my idea." In this
my idea." sentence Schopenhauer
this sentence Schopenhauer has
summed up up the thought
thought of recent
recent philosophy.
philosophy. Schopen
Schopen-
hauer must be mentioned here, here, because his work, The
his main work,
World as as Will and Idea Idea, ever since
y
since its
its publication
publication in in 1818,
1818,
has most persistently
persistently determined the whole tone of all of
all
nineteenth- and twentieth-century

twentieth-century thoughtthought-even even where
this
this isis not immediately
immediately obvious,
obvious, and even where Schopen Schopen-
hauer's statement is opposed. We forget
is opposed. forget too too easily
easily that a
thinker is is more essentially
essentially effective
effective where he is is opposed
opposed
than where he fmds

finds agreement. Nietzsche had to
agreement. Even Nietzsche to pass
pass
through
through a head-on confrontation with Schopenhauer
Schopenhauer; and 5
despite
despite the
the fact
fact that
that his
his understandillg of the will
understanding of will was the
the
opposite
opposite of Schopenhauer's,
Schopenhauer's, Nietzsche held
held fast
fast to
to Schopen
Schopen-
hauer's axiom:
axiom; "The world is is my
my idea."
idea." Schopenhauer
Schopenhauer
himself says
says the
the following
following about this
this axiom (in (in Chapter
Chapter
One,
One, Volume Two of of his
his main work)
work) : :
"" 'The
*The world is is my
my idea'-this,
idea' like the
this, like the axioms of of
Euclid,
Euclid, is
is a statement whose truth truth must be recognized
recognized by by
anyone
anyone who understands it; though not
it; though not (a(a statement)
statement) of of
the
the kind thatthat anyone
anyone understands who hears hears it.it.-To To
have made us us conscious
conscious of this statement,
of this statement, and to to have
connected it it with the problem of
the problem of the
the relation
relation of
of the
the ideal
ideal
to
to the real,
real, i.e.,
i.e., the
the relation
relation ofof the
the world in in the
the head to to
the world outside
outside the head-this,
head this, in in addition
addition to to the
the
problem
problem of of moral freedom,
freedom, is is what gives
gives its
its distinctive
distinctive
character to to the philosophy
philosophy of of the
the moderns.
modems. For only only
after thousands of years years of trials
trials with purely
purely objective
objective
philosophizing
philosophizing did we discover that, among
that, among the many
many
things
things that make the world so so enigmatic
enigmatic and so so thought-
thought-
provoking,
provoking, the closest
closest and most immediate thing thing isis this
this::
however immeasurable and massive the the world may may be,be,
yet
yet its single thin thread
its existence hangs by one single thin thread: and
hangs by :
that is
is the given
given individual consciousness
consciousness in in which it it is
is
constituted."
constituted."
Given this
this discord among philosophers concerning
among philosophers concerning what
the forming
forming of ideas
ideas is
is in essence, there is
essence, there is patently
patently just
just one
way out into the open.
open. WeWe leave the field
field of
of philosophical
philosophical
speculation
speculation behind us,us, and first of all
first of all investigate
investigate carefully
carefully
and scientifically
scientifically how matters really
really stand
stand with thethe ideas
ideas
that occur in living
living beings,
beings, especially in men and animals.
especially in animals.
Such investigations
investigations are among
among thethe concerns
concerns of of psychology.
psychology.
Psychology
Psychology is is today a well-established
today already exten
well-established and already exten-
sive science,
science, and its
its importance is
importance is growing
growing year year by
by year.
year.
PART II
PAR.T 4t
41
But we here leave to to one side the findings

side the findings of of psychology
concerning what it
concerning it calls
calls "ideas";
"ideas"; not not because
because these findings
are
are incorrect,
incorrect, letlet alone unimportant,
unimportant 7 but but because
because theythey areare
scientific
scientific findings.
findings. For, For, being scientific statements,
being scientific statements, they they
are
are already
already operating
operating in a a realm which for for psychology
psychology,? too too,?
must remain on that that other
other side of which we spoke
side of spoke before.
before. It It
is
is no cause for for wonder,
wonder, then,then, thatthat within psychology
psychology it it
never becomes clear clear in in any
any wayway what it it is
is toto which ideas
ideas
are
are attributed
attributed and referred-to
referred wit, the
to wit, the organism
organism of living
of living
things,
things, consciousness,
consciousness, the the soul, the unconscious
soul, the unconscious and all all the
the
depths
depths and strata
strata in in which the the realm of of psychology
psychology is is
articulated.
articulated. Here everything
eveiything remains in in question
question; and yet
5
yet,?
the
the scientific
scientific fmdings
findings are are correct.
correct.
If
If we nonetheless
nonetheless leave leave science aside now in
science aside in dealing with
dealing with
the
the question
question what it it is
is to
to form ideas,
ideas, we do do so not in
so not in thethe
proud
proud delusion
delusion that that we have all all the
the answers,
answers, but out out of of
discretion
discretion inspired
inspired by by aa lack
lack of knowledge.
of knowledge.
The word "idea" comes from the Greek EL8ru tc> which
means to see,
see, face,
face, meet,
meet, be face-to-face.
face-to-face.
We stand outside
We outside of science. Instead we stand before aa
science. Instead
tree in bloom,
tree bloom, for example--and
example and the the tree
tree stands
stands before us. us.
The tree
tree faces
faces us.
us. The tree tree and we meet one another, another, as as
the tree stands
stands there and we stand face face toto face
face with it. it. As
we are in thisthis relation
relation of one to to the
the other
other and beforebefore the
other, tree and we are. This face-to-face
other, the tree face-to-face meeting
meeting is is not^
not,
then,
then, one of these "ideas"'ideas' buzzing
* *
buzzing about in in our heads.

heads. Let
us stop
stop here for a moment,
moment, as as we would to to catch
catch our breath
before and after
before after a leap.
leap. For that is is what we are now, now, men
who have leapt,
leapt, out of of the familiar realm of of science
science and
even,
even, as
as we shall
shall see,
see, out of the realm of philosophy. And
of philosophy.
where have we leapt? leapt? Perhaps
Perhaps into into an abyss?
abyss? No! Rather,
Rather,
onto some firm soil. soil. Some? No! But on that that soil
soil upon
upon which
we live
live and die,
die, if
if we are honest with ourselves.ourselves. A curious,
curious,
indeed unearthly
unearthly thing thing that we must first first leap
leap onto the soil soil
on which we really really stand.

stand. When anything anything so so curious
curious as as
this
this leap
leap becomes necessary,
necessary, something
something must have happened happened
that gives
gives food for for thought.
thought. Judged scientifically, of course,
Judged scientifically, course,
it
it remams
remains the the most inconsequential
inconsequential thing thing on earth earth that that
each ofof us has at at some time stood stood facing
facing a a tree
tree inin bloom.
After all,all,
what of of it?
it? WeWe come and stand stand facing
facing a tree, tree,
before it,it, and
the tree
tree faces,
faces, meets us. us. Which one is is meeting
meeting
here? The tree, or we? Or both? Or neither?
tree, or
neither? We come and
stand-just
stand just asas we are,
are, and not merely
merely with our head or our
consciousness-facing
consciousness facing thethe tree in bloom,
tree in bloom, and the tree tree faces,
faces,
meets usus as the tree
as the tree it it is.
is. Or did
did the
the tree
tree anticipate
anticipate us and
come before
before us? us? Did the tree tree come first first to
to stand and face
us,
us, so
so that
that we might
might come forward face-to-faceface-to-face with it? it?
What happens
happens here,here, that
that the tree
tree stands there to
stands there to face
face us, us,
and we come to to stand
stand face-to-face
face-to-face with the tree? Where
the tree?
does
does this
this presentation
presentation take place, when we stand
take place, stand face-to-
face-to-
face
face before
before a a tree
tree inin bloom? Does it it by
by anyany chance take take
place
place in
in our heads? Of course; course many
}
many things
things maymay taketake place
place
in our brain when we stand on a meadow and have standing standing
before us a blossoming
blossoming tree all its
tree in all its radiance and fragrance
fragrance
when we perceive
-when perceive it. fact, we even have transforming
it. In fact, transforming
and amplifying
amplifying apparatus
apparatus that can show the processes processes in in
our heads as as brain currents,
currents, render them audible, audible, and re re-
trace their course in curves. curves. We can-of can course! Is
of course! Is there
there
anything
anything modemmodern man can not do? He even can be helpful helpful
now and then, then, with what he can do. do. And he is is helping
helping
everywhere
everywhere with the best
best intentions.
intentions. Man can-probably
can probably
none of us have as as yet
yet the least premonition of
least premonition of what man
will
will soon be able to to do scientifically.
scientifically. But But-to stay with our
to stay
example--while
example while science science records the brain currents, currents, what
becomes of the tree tree in bloom? What becomes of of the the
meadow? What becomes of the man man-not not ofof the brain but
of the man,
man, who may may die die under our hands tomorrow and
be lost
lost to
to us,
us, and who at at one time came to to our encounter?
What becomes of the face-to-face, meeting, the
face-to-face, the meeting, the seeing,
seeing,
the forming
forming of the idea,
idea, in which the
the tree
tree presents itself
presents itself
and man comes to to stand face-to-face with the the tree?
tree?
PART II
PART 43
When ideas
'Wben Ideas areare formed
formed in in this
this way,
way, aa variety
variety of of things
happen
happen presumably
presumably also also inin what is Is described
described as as the
the sphere
of
of consciousness
consciousness and and regarded
regarded as as pertaining
pertaining to to the soul.
soul. But
does
does the tree
tree stand "in "In our consciousness,"
consciousness/ or does
7
does it It stand
stand
meadow? Does the meadow lie
on the meadow? Me inIn the soul,
soul, asas experi-
experi-
ence,
ence ? or
or is
Is it
It spread
spread out
out there on earth? Is
Is the earth
earth in
In our
head? Or do we stand on the earth?
It will be said in
It In rebuttal What is
rebuttal : "What
: Is the use of of such ques- ques
tions concerning
concerning a
a state
state of affairs
affairs which everybody
everybody will
will in
in
fairness
fairness admit immediately,
immediately, since since itit is
Is clear
clear as as day
day to to all
all the
world that we are standing standing on the earth earth and,
and, in in our ex ex-
ample,
ample, face-to-face with a tree? tree? But let let us not not slip
sip too too
hastily
hastily into
Into this
this admission,
admission,, let accept and take this
let us not accept this
"clear asas day" lightly. For we shall
day" too lightly. shall forfeit
forfeit everything
everything
before we know it, It, once the sciences
sciences of
of physics, physiology,
physics, physiology 7
and psychology,
psychology, not to
to forget scientific philosophy, display
forget scientific philosophy, display
the panoply
panoply of their documents and proofs^ proofs, to to explain
explain to to us
that what we see and accept accept is is properly
properly not a tree tree but in in
reality
reality a void,
void, thinly
thinly sprinkled
sprinkled with electricelectric charges
charges here
and there that race hither and yon yon at at enormous speeds. speeds. It It
will
will not do to to admit,
admit, justjust for the scientifically
scientifically unguarded
unguarded
moments,
moments, so to speak, speak, that, naturally, we are
that, naturally, are standing
standing face face
to face with a tree tree in bloom,
bloom, onlyonly toto affirm
affirm the very very next
moment as as equally
equally obvious that this this view,
view, naturally,
naturally, typi typi-
fies
fies only
only the naive,
na1ve, because pre-scientific,
pre-scientific, comprehension
comprehension of
things. For with that
things. affirmation we have conceded some
that affirmation some-
thing consequences we have
thing whose consequences have hardly
hardly considered,
considered, and
that is:
that is: that
that those
those sciences
sciences do in in fact
fact decide
decide what of of the
tree in bloom may
tree may or may may not be considered
considered valid valid reality.
reality.
Whence
"Whence do the sciencessciences-which necessarily are
which necessarily are always
always In in
the dark about the origin their own
origin of their own nature
nature--derivederive the the
authority to
authority to pronounce
pronounce such verdicts?verdicts? Whence
"Whence do the the sci
sci-
derive the right
ences derive right toto decide
decide what man's man's place
place is,is, and to to
offer themselves as
offer as the standard
standard that that justifies
justifies such deci deci-
sions? And they
sions? they will
will do so so just
just asas soon
soon as as we tolerate,
tolerate, if if only
only
by our
by our silence,
silence, that
that our standing
standing face-to-face
face-to-face with with the the tree
tree
is
is no more than a a pre-scientifically intended relation
pre-seientifically intended relation to to
something
something we still still happen
happen to call "tree."
to call "tree." In truth, we are
In truth, are
today
today rather inclined
inclined to to favor
favor a supposedly
supposedly superior
superior physi
physi-
cal
cal and physiological
physiological knowledge,
knowledge., and to to drop
drop the
the blooming
blooming
tree.
tree.
When we think think through
through what this this is,
is, that
that aa tree
tree in
in bloom
presents
presents itself
itself to us so
to us so that
that we cancan come and stand stand face-to-
face-to-
face with it,
face the thing that matters first
it, the thing that
first and foremost,
foremost, and
finally,
finally, is
is not
not toto drop
drop the
the tree in bloom,
tree in bloom, but for for once letlet it
it
stand where it it stands.
stands. Why
Why do we say say "finally"?
"finally"? Because
to
to this
this day,
day, thought
thought has never let let the
the tree
tree stand
stand where it it
stands.
stands.
Still,
Still 7
the scientific
the scientific study
study of of the
the history
history of of Western
thought
thought reports
reports that
that Aristotle, judged by
Aristotle, judged by his
his theory
theory of of
knowledge,
knowledge, was a a realist.
realist. A realist is aa man who affirms
realist is affirms the
the
existence
existence and knowability
knowability of of the external
external world.
world. Indeed,
Indeed, it it
never occurred
occurred to to Aristotle
Aristotle to deny the
to deny the existence
existence ofof the
the
external world. Nor did it it ever occur to to Plato,
Plato, any
any more
than toto Heraclitus or Parmenides. But neither neither diddid these
these
thinkers ever specifically
specifically affirm the presence
presence of of the external
external
world,
world, let
let alone prove
prove it.
it,
Summary
Transition
We got
We got into the question:
question what is
: is this
this anyway
anyway-to to form an
idea? For the moment,
moment, II need not remark on the the steps that
steps that
brought
brought us toto this point. But we must always
this point. always keep
keep remind
remind-
ing
ing ourselves of the wayway we are trying
trying toto walk.
walk. We mark it it
with the question
question:: what is called thinking
is called thinking-what does
what does
call for thinking?
call thinking? By By way
way of this question, we get
this question, get into
into the
the
question:
question what is
: is this-to
this to form aa representational
representational idea?
idea?
It could be supposed
supposed that the forming
forming of of thoughts
thoughts and
the forming
foiming of ideas may may well be one and the the same thing.
thmg.
The prospect
prospect opens
opens up up on this possibility, that
this possibility, that the
the tradi
tradi-
tional nature of thinking
thinking has received its shape
received its shape from repre-
repre-
PART II
PART 45
sentations,
sentations that thoughts
? thoughts are are a a kind of of representational
idea.
idea. That is is true.
true. But at at the same time it it remains obscure
obscure
how this
this shaping
shaping of the nature of of traditional
traditional thinking takes
place. The source of
place. of the event remains obscure. And it
remains obscure. it re
re-
mains obscure finally
finally what all this signifies
all this signifies forfor our attempt
attempt
to
to learn thinking.
thinking. We We understand, of course,
understand, of course 7
and consider
consider it it
the most obvious thing world, when someone says
thing in the world, says, "I
7
think the matter is is such and such,"

7
such/ and with it it has

has in in mind
mind,5
"I
**I have such and such an idea of of the matter." It It clearly
clearly fol
fol-
lows that to to think is is to
to form ideas.
ideas. Yet all all the
the relations
relations
called
called up
up byby this
this statement remain in in the
the shadow. Basically
Basically
they
they are still
still inaccessible
inaccessible to to us.
us. Let usus be honest
honest with our our-
selves:
selves the essential
: essential nature of thinking, the
of tMnMng 7
the essential
essential origin
origin
of thinking,
tibdnMng, the essential
essential possibilities
possibilities ofof thanking
thinking that that are
are
comprehended
comprehended in that that origin-they
origin are all
they are strange to
all strange to us
us,7
and byby that very very fact
fact they
they areare what givesgives us food for for
thought
thought before all all else
else and always;
always, which is is not
not surprising
surprising
if
if the assertion
assertion remains true that that what is is most thought-
thought-
provoking
provoking in our thought-provoking
thought-provoking age age is that we are
is that are still
still
not thinking.
thinking. But that assertion also that we are on the
says also
assertion says
way,
way in thought,
7
thought, to to the essence of thought. We are
of thought. are under-
way, and by
way 7 by such waysways have taken our departure departure from a
thinking
thinking whose essential
essential nature seems to to lie
lie in the forming
forming
of ideas and to to exhaust itself that. Our own manner of
in that.
itself in
thinking
thinking still
still feeds on the traditional
traditional nature of of thinking
thinking,7
the forming
forming of representational
representational ideas.ideas. But we still still do not
think inasmuch as as we have not yet yet entered intointo that
that nature
which is is proper
proper to to thinking,
thinking and which is
7
is still
still reserved^
reserved,
withheld from us. We are still
us. We in the reality
still not in reality of thought.
thought.
The real
real nature of thought
thought might itself, however
might show itself however, at
7 7
at
that very
very point
point where it it once withdrew,
withdrew, if only we will
if only will pay
pay
heed toto this
this withdrawal,
withdrawal, if only we will
if only will not insist,
insist, con
con-
fused byby logic, already know perfectly
logic, that we already perfectly well what
thinking
thinking is.is. The real
real nature of thought
thought might
might reveal
reveal itself
itself
to
to us if
if we remain underway.
underway. We We are underway.
underway. What does
46 WHAT THINKING?
CALLED THINKING?
WHAT IS CALLED
that mean? We are still inter

are still inter vias,
vias^ between divergent
divergent ways. ways.
Nothing
Nothing has been "been decided
decided yet yet about which is the one in-
is the in
evitable,
evitable, and hence perhaps perhaps the only, only, way.
way. Underway,
Underway, then then
-we we must give give particularly
particularly close
close attention
attention to to that
that stretch
stretch
of way
way on which we are are putting
putting our feet. feet. We meant to to be
be
attentive
attentive to to itit from thethe first lecture on.
first lecture on. But it it seems thatthat
we have stillstill not been fullyfully in earnest about that
in earnest that intention,
intention,
with allall its
its consequences.
consequences. As a marker on our path
path of of
thought,
thought, we quoted quoted the the words of of the West's last
the West's thinker,
last thinker,
Nietzsche. He said: said "The wasteland grows
: grows . . .."" We ex
. . ex-
plicitly
plicitly contrasted
contrasted thesethese words with other other statements
statements about about
the present
present age, age, not onlyonly because of of their
their special
special content,.\
content^
but above all all inin view of of the manner in which they they speak.
speak.
For they speak
they speak in
in terms of
of the kind of
of way
way on which
Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's thinking
thinking proceeds.
proceeds. That way, way, however,
however, comes conies
from far
far away,
away, and at at every point gives
every point gives evidence
evidence of of that
that
origin.
origin. Nietzsche neither made nor chose his his wayway himself,
himself,
no more than any any other thinker ever did. He is
ever did. is sent
sent on his his
way.
way. And so so the words "The wasteland grows . . ."
grows .. " be
. be-
come a word on the way. way. This means means: the tale
: tale that
that these
these
words tells
tells does not just just throw light light on thethe stretch
stretch of of the
the
way
way and its its surroundings. The tale
surroundings. tale itself
itself traces
traces and clears clears
the way.
way. The words are never aa mere statement statement about the the
modern age, age, which could could be freely
freely taken out out ofof Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's
exposition.
exposition. Still Still less
less are they expression of
they an expression of Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's
experiences. To say
inner experiences. say it
it more completely: Nietzsche's
completely Nietzsche's
:
words are such an expression,

expression, too,too, ofof course,
course, ifif we conceive
conceive
language in its
of language its most superficial character-as
superficial character people
as people
usually
usually do-and
do and take the view that that it
it presses
presses the the internal
internal
outward into into the external and thus thus is is-expression.
expression. But even even
if we do not take his
if his words "The wasteland grows" grows" in in this
this
manner, the mere mention of
obvious manner, of Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's name
brings rushing to
brings rushing to our minds a flood flood ofof ideas
ideas-ideas ideas which
today less
today less than ever offer offer assurance that that they
they point
point toward
this thinker
what this thinker really
really thought.
thought.
PAET
PART II 47
But because
But because those
those words
words "The
"The wasteland
wasteland grows
grows . . .""
will be
will be seen
seen in
in aa very
very special
special light as we
light as we proceed
proceed,? while
while the
the
name "Nietzsche"
name "Nietzsche" threatens
threatens to
to become
become merely
merely aa label
label of
of
ignorance and
and misinterpretation^
misinterpretation; and
and because
because the
the allusion
allusion
ignorance
our lecture
in our
in lecture to
to these
these words
words has
has led
led to
to aa variety
variety of
of rash
rash and
and
mistaken interim
mistaken interim opinions^
opinions, we
we shall
shall here
here reach
reach ahead
ahead and
and
anticipate some
anticipate
some of
of what
what is
is to
to follow. In order
follow. In order not
not to
to confuse
confuse
the course
the of our
course of our presentation^
presentation, wewe shall
shall be
be content
content with
with an
an
allusion.
allusion.
LECTURE
v
V
.-.
is called
What Is thinking? We
called thinking? We must guard against the blind
guard against blind
urge to
urge
to snatch
snatch at quick answer in the form of
at aa quick of a formula.
We
We must stay question. We
stay with the question. We must pay pay attention
attention to
to
the way
the way in in which the the question asks : what is
question asks : is called thinking,
thinking,
what does
does call
call for thinking?
for thinking?
"You justjust wait-I'll
wait I'll teach you you what we call call obedience!"
aa mother might
might saysay to boy who won't come home. Does
to her boy
she
she promise definition of obedience? No. Or is
promise him a definition
she
is she
going
going to give him aa lecture? No again,
to give again, if she is is a proper
proper
mother. Rather,
Rather, she will convey convey to to him what obedience is. is.
Or better,
better, the other way way around: she will bring bring him to
obey. success will be more lasting
obey. Her success lasting the less
less she scolds
scolds
him;
him it
5
it will
will be easier,
easier, the more directly
directly she can get get him to
listen-not
listen not just
just condescend
condescend to to listen,
listen, but listen in such a
a
way
way that he can no longer longer stop
stop wanting
wanting to do it. And why?
it. And
Because
Because his his ears
ears have
have been
been opened
opened and he now can can hear
what
what is is in
in accord
accord with
with his
his nature.
nature. Learning,
Learning, then,then, cannot
be
be brought
brought aboutabout by by scolding.
scolding. Even so, so, a
a man who teachesteaches
must
must at at times
times grow
grow noisy.
noisy. InIn fact,
fact, he
he may have to
may have scream
to scream
and
and scream,
scream, although
although the aim is
the aim is to make his students
to make students learn
learn
so
so quiet
quiet aa thing
thing as as thinking.
thinking. Nietzsche,
Nietzsche, mostmost quiet and
quiet and
shiest
shiest of
of men, knew of
men, knew of this
this necessity.
necessity. HeHe endured
endured the the agony
agony
of
of having
having to to scream.
scream. In In aa decade when the world at large
decade when the world at large
48
48
PAET II
PART 49
still knew nothing

still knew nothing of of world
world wars,wars, when faith faith in in "progress"
"progress"
was virtually the religion
was virtually the religion of of thethe civilized
civilized peoples and
nations,
nations, Nietzsche screamed out into into the the world: "'The
*%
The
wasteland growsgrows . . .."
. . " He thus put put thethe question
question to to hisMs
fellowmen
fellowmen and and above
above all
all toto himself:
himself "Must one smash their
: their
ears
ears before they they learn
learn to to listen
listen with their their eyes?
eyes? Must one
clatter
clatter like
lite kettledrums and preachers preachers of of repentance?"*
repentance?"*
But riddle upon upon riddle!
riddle! What was once the the scream "The
wasteland growsgrows . . . ,''
. *
," now threatens to
. to turn intointo chat-
chat
ter.
ter. The threat of this this perversion
perversion is is part
part of of what givesgives us
food
food for thought.
thought. The threat is is that perhaps this
that perhaps this most
thoughtful thought will
thoughtful thought will today,
today, and still still more tomorrow,
tomorrow,
become suddenly
suddenly no more than a a platitude
platitude,7 and as platitude
as platitude
spread
spread and circulate.
circulate. This fashionfashion of of talking platitudes is
talking platitudes at
is at
work in that endless
endless profusion
profusion of books describing
of books describing the the state
state
of the world today. today. They
They describe
describe what by by its nature is
its nature is
indescribable, because it
indescribable, it lends itself
itself to to being
being thought
thought about
only in a thinking
only thinking that is is a kind of of appeal,
appeal, a call call-and and
therefore must at times become a scream. Script easily
Script easily
smothers the scream,
scream, especially
especially if if the script
script exhausts
exhausts itself
itself
in description,
description, and aims to to keep men's imagination
keep men's imagination busy busy
by supplying
by supplying it constantly with new matter.
it constantly matter. The burden of of
thought
thought is is swallowed up up in in the written script, script, unless
unless the the
writing is
writing is capable
capable of remaining,
remaining, even in in the script
script itself,
itself, a
progress of thinking,
progress thinking, aa way. way. About the the time when the
words "The wasteland grows grows . . .."" were bom,
. . hom, Nietzsche
wrote in hishis notebook (GW (GW XIV, XIV, p. p. 229, Aphorism 464 of
229, Aphorism of
1885) : "A man for
1885) : for whom nearly nearly all books have become
all books
superficial, who has kept
superficial, kept faith
faith in in only
only a few people people of of the
past that they
past they have had depth depth enough
enough-not not toto write
write what
what
they knew." But Nietzsche
they Nietzsche had to to scream.
scream. For For him,
him, there
there
other way
was no other way toto do it it than by by writing.
writing. That written written
scream of of Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's thought
thought is is the
the book
book which
which he he entitled
entitled
Spoke Zarathustra.
Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Its Its first
first three
three parts
parts were
were written
written
* Thus Spoke
*
Spoke 2>arathustraj
Zarathustra, Prologue^
Prologue, f*f.
and published
published between 1883 1885 and 1884. The fourth fourth part part
was written in in 1884/85,
1884/85, but printedprinted only only forfor his
his closest
closest
circle
circle ofof friends.
friends. That work thinks thinks this this thinker's
thinker's one and
only
only thought:
thought the: the thought
thought of the eternal
of the eternal recurrence
recurrence of of the
the
same. Every
Every thinker
thinker thinks
thinks one only only thought.
thought. Here,Here, too, too,
thinking
thinking differs
differs essentially
essentially from science.
science. The researcher
researcher
needs constantly
constantly new discoveries
discoveries and inspirations,
inspirations, else else
science
science will
will bog
bog down and fall into error.
fall into error. The thinker
thinker needs
needs
one thought
thought only.
only. And for the thinker
for the thinker the the difficulty
difficulty is is to
to
hold fast
fast to
to this
this one only
only thought
thought as as the
the one and only only thing
thing
that
that he must think;think to
5
to think this
this One as as the
the Same
Same; and to
j
to
tell of
tell of this
this Same in in the
the fitting speak of the
fitting manner. But we speak of the
Same in in the
the manner that that befits it only
befits it only ifif we always
always say say the
the
same about it, in such a way
it, in way that
that we ourselves
ourselves are are claimed
claimed
by
by thethe Self-Same. The limitlessness
limitlessness of of the
the Same is is the
the
sharpest
sharpest limit
limit set
set to
to thinking.
thinking. The thinkerthinker Nietzsche
Nietzsche hints hints
at
at this
this hidden fittingness
fittingness of thought
thought by by giving
giving his his Thus
Spoke
Spoke Zarathustra aa subtitlesubtitle which runs : A :A Book for for Every
Every-
one and No One. "For Everyone"-that
Everyone" that does does not mean for for
everybody
everybody as just anybody;
as just anybody "For Everyone"
$
Everyone" means for for each
man as as man,
man, forfor each man each time his his essential
essential nature
nature
becomes for him an object object worthy
worthy of of his thought. "And No
his thought.
One" that means: for none among
One"-that among these these men prevailing
prevailing
everywhere
everywhere who merely merely intoxicate themselves with isolated
intoxicate themselves isolated
fragments
fragments and passages passages from the the book and then blindly blindly
stumble about in its its language, instead
language, instead of of getting
getting underway
underway
on its
its way of thinking, and thus becoming first
thinking, becoming first of of all ques-
all ques
tionable to to themselves. Thus Spoke Zarathustra: A
Spoke Zarathustra: A Book
for Everyone
for Everyone and No One. In what an unearthly unearthly fashionfashion
this subtitle has come true in the the seventy years since
seventy years since thethe
book first appeared only in
first appeared-only in the exactly
exactly opposite
opposite sense.
sense. It It
has become a book for everyman, everyman, and not not oneone thinker
thinker has has
appeared
appeared who could stand up to this
up to this book's
book's basic
basic thought,
thought,
and toto its darkness. In this
its darkness. this book,
book, itsits fourth
fourth and final final partj
part;
Nietzsche wrote the words: "The wasteland wasteland grows grows . . ;"
. .
PART II
PAR.T 51
51
Into
Into those words,
words, Nietzsche put all he knew. They
put all They areare thethe
title
title of a poem
poem Nietzsche wrote when he was "most distant
from cloudy,
cloudy, damp,
damp, melancholy
melancholy Old Europe." Europe." Complete,
Complete,
the words run run:: "The wasteland grows: grows : woe to to him who
hides wastelands within!"
hides wastelands within!' Woe to
7
to whom? "\Vas Was Nietzsche
Nietzsche
thinking
thinking of himself?
Mmself ? What if if he had known that that itit was Ms his
own thought
thought which would first first have to to bring
bring about
about aa devdev-
astation
astation in whose midst, midst, in in another day day and from other other
sources,
sources, oases
oases would rise rise here and there there and springs springs wellwell
up? What if
up? if he had known that that he himself had to to be a
precursor,
precursor, a transition,
transition, pointing before and behind,
pointing before behind, leading
leading
and rebuffmg,
rebuffing, and therefore everywhere ambiguous,
therefore everywhere ambiguous, even
in
in the manner and in in the
the sense
sense of of thethe transition?
transition? All All
thoughtful
thoughtful thought
thought argues
argues that this is
that this is so,
so, as Nietzsche Mm
as Nietzsche him-
self
self knew and often put put into
into enigmatic
enigmatic words.words. TMs This is is why
why
every
every thoughtful
thoughtful converse
converse with him is is constantly
constantly carried
carried
into
into other dimensions. This is also why
is also why all all formulas
fonnulas and
labels
labels fail
fail in a special
special sense,
sense, and fall fall silent,
silent, in in the face of of
Nietzsche's thought.
thought. We We do not mean to to say
say that
that Nietz
Nietz-
sche's
sche's thought
thought is is no more than a a game
game with images images and
symbols
symbols which can be called called off time. The thought
any time.
off any thought of
his
his thinking
thinking isis as
as unambiguous
unambiguous as as anything
anything can be; be; but this
this
unambiguity
unambiguity is is many-chambered,
many-chambered, in in chambers that that adjoin,
adjoin,
join, and fuse.
join, fuse. One reason is is that allall the
the themes of of Western
thought, though all
thought, though all of them transmuted,
transmuted, fatefullyfatefully gather
gather
together
together inin Nietzsche's thinking. TMs
Nietzsche's thinking. This is is why
why theythey refuse to to
be historically computed and accounted for.
historically computed for. Only
Only a dia dia-
logue
logue can answer,
answer, then,then, toto Nietzsche's thoughtthought which is is a
transition-a
transition dialogue whose own way
a dialogue way is is preparing
preparing a tran tran-
sition.
sition. In such a transition,
transition, Nietzsche's thought thought as as a whole
must,
must, of of course,
course, take
take itsits place
place on the the one side side which the
transition
transition leaves
leaves behind to to move to to the
the other.
other. This transitransi-
tion,
tion, different
different in in its
its reach and kind,kind, is is not here under dis dis-
cussion.
cussion. The remark is is merely
merely to to suggest
suggest that that the transition,
transition,
more far-reaching
far-reaching and differentdifferent in in kind,
kind, must of course
leave the one side, side, but forfor that very reason
that very reason cannot pass pass it
it
over in in the sense
sense of of disregarding
disregarding it. it. In the
the course
course of the
transition,
transition Nietzsche's
?
Nietzsche's thought,
thought, the the entire
entire thought
thought of of the
West is is appropriated in
appropriated in its its proper truth, how
truth. That truth,
proper truth. how-
ever,
ever, is by no means obvious.
is by Nietzsche, we
Regarding Nietzsche,
obvious. Regarding
limit
limit ourselves
ourselves to to rendering visible the
rendering visible the one essential
essential that
that
casts
casts its light ahead as
its light Nietzsche's thinking
as Nietzsche's thinking proceeds
proceeds on its its
way. It
way. It will
will indicate
indicate toto us atat what turn of of his
his thinking
thinking the
words were spoken: spoken: "The wasteland grows grows; woe to
5
to him
who hides
hides wastelands
wastelands within!"
But to to encounter
encounter Nietzsche's thinking at
Nietzsche's thinking all, we must
at all,
first
first fmd
find it.
it. Only when we have succeeded in
Only in finding
finding it it may
may
we trytry toto lose
lose again
again what that thought. And
thinking has thought.
that thinking
this,
this, toto lose,
lose, is
is harder than to to find;
find because "to lose"
5
lose" inin such
a case
case doesdoes not just mean to
not just drop something,
to drop something, leaveleave itit be
be-
hind,
hind, abandon it. it. "To lose"
lose" here means to to make ourselves
ourselves
truly
truly free
free of that which Nietzsche's
thinking has thought.
thought.
And that can be done only only inin this way, that we,
this way, we, on our own
accord and in our memory, memory, set Nietzsche's thought
set Nietzsche's thought freefree into
into
the freedom of its its own essential substance--and
essential substance and soso leave
leave itit
at
at that place
place where it by its
it by belongs. Nietzsche knew
its nature belongs.
of these relations
relations of discovery, finding, and losing.
discovery, finding, losing. All along
along
his
his way,
way, he must have known of of them with ever greater greater
clarity.
clarity. For only only thus can it it be understood that at at the end ofof
his
his way
way he could tell tell it
it with an unearthly clarity. What
unearthly clarity. "What
he still
still had to to say
say in this
this respect
respect is is written on one of of those
those
scraps
scraps of of paper
paper which Nietzsche sent sent out toto his
his friends
friends about
the time when he collapsed collapsed in the street (January 4,
street (January 4, 1889)
1889)
and succumbed to to madness. These scraps scraps areare sometimes
called "epistles
"epistles of delusion." Understood medically, medically, scien-
scien
tifically, that classification

tifically, classification is correct. For the
is correct. the purposes
purposes of of
thinking,
thinking, it it remains inadequate.
inadequate.
One of these scraps scraps isis addressed to to the
the Dane Georg Georg
Brandes, who had delivered the
Brandes, the first
first public
public lectures
lectures on
Nietzsche at at Copenhagen,
Copenhagen, in 1888.
PART
PAR.T II 53
55
"Postmark Torino, 44 Jan

"Postmark Torino, Jan 89
89
"To my friend
To my
4t
friend Georg!
Georg!
you had discovered
After you discovered me,
me, itit was no
no trick
trick to
to find
find
me : the
: difficulty now is
the difficulty is to
to lose
lose me. . . . .
The Crucified."
Crucified."
Did Nietzsche
Nietzsche know that that through Mm
through him something
something was
put into
put into words that
that can never be lost
lost again?
again? Something
Something that
cannot be lost
cannot lost again
again to
to thinking
thinking,? something
something toto which think
think-
ing must forever come back again
ing again the
the more thoughtful
thoughtful itit
becomes? He knew it. it. For the decisive
decisive sentence,
sentence, introduced
by aa colon,
by colon, is
is no longer
longer addressed only
only to
to the
the recipient
recipient of
the paper.
the paper. The sentence
sentence expresses
expresses a a universal
universal fateful
fateful state
state
of
of affairs. difficulty now is
affairs. "The difficulty is to
to lose
lose me. .. .. ."Now,
. " Now, and
for
for all
all men, henceforth. This is
men, and henceforth. why we read the sen
is why sen-
tence,
tence, even the the whole content
content ofof the
the paper,
paper, asas if
if it
it were
addressed
addressed to to us.
us. Now thatthat we can look over the sixty-three
sixty-three
years passed
years passed since
since then,
then, at least in their
least in outlines, we
their broad outlines,
must admit,
admit, of of course,
course, that there remains for us the further
difficulty
difficulty first
first of all
all to
to find Nietzsche, though he has been
Nietzsche, though
discovered,
discovered, that is, is, though
though itit is
is known that the event of this
thinker's
thinker's thinking
thinking has taken place.place. In fact, this known fact
fact, this
only
only increases danger that we shall
increases the danger shall not find Nietzsche,
Nietzsche,
because we imagine
imagine we have already relieved of the
already been relieved
search.
search. Let us not be deluded into the view that Nietzsche's
thought
thought has been found, found, just
just because there exists a Nietz- Nietz
sche
sche literature
literature thatthat has been proliferating
proliferating for
for the last
last fifty
fifty
years. It
years. It is
is as
as though it is
though Nietzsche had foreseen this, this, too;
too; it is
not
not for
for nothing
nothing thatthat he has Zarathustra say: say "They all
: all talk
about
about me . . . but nobody
. . .
nobody gives
gives me a thought."
thought." Thought
can
can be
be given only where there is
given only thinking. How are
is thinking. are we to to
give if we are not
give thought
thought to to Nietzsche's
thinking if are still
still not
thinking?
thinking? Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's thinking,
thinking, after all,
all, does not contain
just
just the
the extravagant
extravagant views of an exceptional
exceptional human being. being.
This
This thinking
thinking putsputs into
into its
its own language that which is,
own language is,
more precisely,
precisely, thatthat which is is still to be.
still to be. For the the "modern
age"
age" isis in
in no way
way at at an end. Rather,
Rather, it it is
is just
just entering
entering thethe
beginning
beginning of of its
its presumably long-drawn-out consumma
presumably long-drawn-out consumma-
tion.
tion. And Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's thought?
thought? Part of of what is is thought-
thought-
provoking is
provoking is that
that Nietzsche's thought has still
Nietzsche's thought still not been
been
found. Part of of what is is most thought-provoking is
thought-provoking is that that we
are not in in the least
least prepared
prepared trulytruly to to lose
lose what is is found,
found,
rather than merely
merely pass
pass it
it over and by-pass
by-pass it. it. Bypassing
Bypassing of of
this
this sort
sort is
is often
often done in in an innocent form form-by offering an
by offering an
overall
overall exposition
exposition of of Nietzsche's philosophy. As though
Nietzsche's philosophy. though
there could be an exposition
exposition thatthat isis not
not necessarily,
necessarily, down
in its
its remotest
remotest nook and cranny, interpretation. As
cranny, an interpretation.
though
though any any interpretation
interpretation could escape escape the the necessity
necessity of of
taking
taking a stand
stand or even,even, simply
simply by by itsits choice
choice of of starting
starting
point,
point, ofof being
being an unspoken rejection and refutation.
unspoken rejection refutation. But
no thinker can ever be overcome by by our refuting
refuting him and
stacking
stacking up up around him a literature
literature of of refutation.
refutation. What aa
thinker has thought
thought can be mastered only only if if we refer
refer every
every-
thing
thing in hishis thought
thought that is is still
still unthought back to
unthought to its
its origi-
origi-
nary
nary truth. Of course, course, the thoughtful
thoughtful dialoguedialogue with the the
thinker does not become any any more comfortable that that way
way;
5
on the contrary,
contrary, it it turns into a a disputation
disputation of of rising
rising acri
acri-
mony.
mony. Meantime,
Meantime, however,
however, Nietzsche goes goes on being being
bravely
bravely refuted.
refuted. This industry,
industry, as as we shall
shall see,
see, had early
early
reached the point point where thoughts
thoughts were fabricated
fabricated and
ascribed to to him which are the exact exact opposite
opposite of of those
those he
really
really thought,
thought, those in which his his thinking
thinking finally
finally con
con-
sumed itself.
itself.
Summary
Transition
The way
way of our question
question "what isis called
called thinking?"
thinking?" has has
brought
brought us to
to the question:
question what is
is this
: this anyway
anyway-to to form
an idea? So far,
far, an answer has suggested itself only
suggested itself only in
in
vague
vague outline:
outline the forming
:
forming of ideas
ideas could
could even be the uni-
the uni-
PART II
PART 55
versally
versally prevailing
prevailing basicbasic characteristic
characteristic of of traditional
traditional think-
ing.
ing. Our own way way derives
derives from such such thinking.
thinking. It therefore
It therefore
remains necessarily
necessarily bound to to aa dialogue
dialogue with traditionaltraditional
thinking.
thinking. And since since our way way is is concerned
concerned with thinking thinking
for
for the specific
specific purpose
purpose of learning
learning it, it, the
the dialogue
dialogue must
discuss
discuss the nature of traditional thinking. But while such
traditional thinking. such
thinking has already
thinking already become aware that that it it is
is aa kind
kind of form-
of form
ing
ing ideas,
ideas, there is is absolutely assurance that
absolutely no assurance that traditional
traditional
thillking
thinking has ever given given sufficient thought to
sufficient thought to the
the essence of of
idea-forming,
idea-forming, or even could do so. so. In any any dialogue
dialogue with
the nature of prevailing
the prevailing thinking,
thinking, then,then, the the essence
essence of of idea-
idea-
forming
forming is is probably
probably the firstfirst thing that
thing that must be put put into
into the
language thinking. If
language of thinking. If we respond
respond to to that
that language,
language, not
only
only do we come to to know thinking
thinking in in its
its historic
historic nature
and destiny-we
destiny we come to to learn thinking itself.
learn thinking itself.
The representative
representative of of traditional thinking who is
traditional tMnking closest
is closest
to in time,
to us in time, and hence most stimulatingstimulating to to this
this discussion,
discussion,
is Nietzsche. For his
is Nietzsche. his thought,
thought, in in traditional
traditional language,
language, tells tells
what is.
is. But the oft-named matters of of fact,
fact, the
the conditions,
conditions,
the tendencies of of the ageage always
always remain only only thethe fore
fore-
ground
ground of of what is. is. Yet Nietzsche's language, too,
Nietzsche's language, too, speaks
speaks
only
only in the foreground,
foreground, so so long
long as as we understand it it exclu
exclu-
sively
sively in terms of the language language of of traditional
traditional thinking,
thinking,
instead
instead ofof listening
listening forfor what remains unspoken unspoken in it. Ac
in it. Ac-
cordingly, we gave
cordingly, gave ear from the start start to to aa word of of Nietzsche
which lets
lets us hear something unspoken: "The wasteland
something unspoken:
grows;
grows woe to
5
to him who hides wastelands within!"
But itit has become necessary
necessary to to improve
improve our ability ability to to
listen. We shall
listen. We shall do so so with a suggestion that
a suggestion that will
will turn us
more pointedly
pointedly in the direction direction in in which Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's
thought
thought is is striving. Nietzsche sees
striving. clearly that
sees clearly that inin the
the history
history
of
of Western man something
something is is coming to
coming to an end : what until
: until
now and long long since
since has remained uncompleted.
uncompleted. Nietzsche
sees the necessity
sees necessity to to carry
carry it it to
to a a completion.
completion. But comple comple-
tion
tion does
does not mean here that that a a part
part is is added which was
56 WHAT
IS CALLED THINKING?
missing before
missing before;5 this completion does not make whole by
this completion by
patching;9 it
patching it makes whole by by achieving
achieving at last the whole
at last whole-
whole,? by
ness of the whole transforming what has
by thus transforming has been so
so
ar? in virtue of the whole.
far,
f
if we are to
But if to catch sight
sight of even a fraction of
of these
fateful relations, we must extricate
fateful relations, extricate ourselves again from
ourselves again
the error into which we have fallen,fallen, that one can think
through Nietzsche's
through Nietzsche's thinking
thinking byby dealing
dealing with it it histori
histori-
cally. That mistaken attitude feeds on the view that Nietz
cally. Nietz-
sche's thought can be put
sche's thought put aside as something
something that is is past
past and
well refuted. People have no idea how difficult
refuted. People difficult it
it is
is truly
truly to
to
lose
lose that thought
thought again
again-assuming
assuming it it has been found.
But everything
everything argues it has not even been found
argues that it
yet. Accordingly, we must first
yet. Accordingly, first search for it.it. And our sug sug-
gestion concerning the direction of Nietzsche's own way
gestion conceming way is
is
thus still
still a searching suggestion.
searching suggestion.
LECTURE
LECTURE
VI
With greater
greater clarity
darity than any any man before him, him, Nietzsche
saw the necessity
necessity of a change in the realm of
a change essential
of essential
thinking,
thinking? and with this this change
change the dangerdanger that conven-
conven
tional man will
will adhere with growing obstinacy to the
growing obstinacy the trivial
trivial
surface of his conventional nature, acknowledge only
nature, and acknowledge only
the flatness of these flatlands as his proper
as his proper habitation
habitation on
earth. The danger
danger is is all
all the greater
greater because it it arises
arises atat a
moment in history
history which Nietzsche was the first first man to to
recognize
recognize clearly,
clearly, and the only only man so so far toto think through
through
metaphysically in all
metaphysically all its
its implications.
implications. It It is
is the moment
when man is is about to assume dominion of the earth as as a
whole.
Nietzsche was the firstfirst man to to raise
raise the question
question: Is
: Is man,
man,
as he has been and stillstill is,
is, prepared
prepared to to assume thatthat domin
domin-
ion? If not,
not, then what must happen happen to to man as as he is,
is, so
so that
that
he can make the earth "subject"
"subject" to to himself and thus thus fulfill
fulfill
the words of an old testament? Within the purview purview of of his
his
thinking, Nietzsche calls
thinking, calls man as as he has been till till now "the
last man." This is
last is not toto say
say that allall human existence will will
end with the man so Rather, the last
so named. Rather, last man is is the
man who is is no longer
longer able to to look beyond
beyond himself,
himself, to to rise
rise
above himself for once up to the level
up to level of his
his task,
task, and under
under-
that task
take that task in a way
way that is is essentially right. Man so
essentially right. so far
57
58
58 WHAT
IS CALLED THINKING?
is incapable
is incapable of of it,
it, because
because he he has
has not yet come
not yet come intointo his his
own full
own full nature.
nature. Nietzsche
Nietzsche declares
declares thatthat man's
man's essential
essential
nature is
nature is not
not yet
yet determined
determined-it has neither
it has neither beenbeen found
found
nor been
nor been secured.
secured. This is is why
why Nietzsche
Nietzsche sayssays: "Man
: "Man is is the
the
as yet
as yet undetermined
undetermined animal." animal." The The statement
statement sounds sounds
strange. Yet it only puts into words
strange. Yet it only puts into
words what
what Western
Western thought
thought
has thought
has thought of of man from the beginning. Man is
the beginning. is the
the rational
rational
animal. Through
animal. reason, man
Through reason, man raises
raises himself
himself above
above thethe aniani-
mal, but
mal, but so so that
that he must constantly
constantly look look down upon upon the the
animal, subject
animal, subject it,
it, master
master it. If we call
it. If call animal character
character-
istics "sensual/'
istics "sensual," and take take reason
reason as as non-sensual
non-sensual or or supra-
supra-
sensual, then roan-the
sensual, then man
rational animal
the rational animal-appears
appears as as the
the
sensual supra-sensual
sensual supra-sensual being. being. If If we follow
follow tradition
tradition and call call
the sensual
the sensual "physical/'
"physical," then reason, reason, the supra-sensual,
supra-sensual, is is
what goes
goes beyond
beyond the the sensual,
sensual, the the physical
physical; in Greek,
5
Greek, "be "be-
yond"
yond" is p.era; fLETa
is fJLerd^ pera Ta ra cpwnKa beyond the physical,
<f>vcn,Kci means beyond physical,
the sensual;
the sensual, the the supra-sensual,
supra-sensual, in in passing
passing beyond
beyond the physi physi-
cal, is the
cal, is metaphysical. Man conceived as
the metaphysical. as the rational ani ani-
mal is is the
the physical
physical exceeding
exceeding the physical;
physical; in shortshort-in the
in the
nature
nature of of man as as the
the rational animal, there is
rational animal, is gathered
gathered the
passing
passing from the physical physical to non-physical, the supra-
to the non-physical, supra-
physical:
physical thus
: thus man himself is metaphysical. But since
the metaphysical.
is the
for
for Nietzsche
Nietzsche neither man's physical, physical, sensual side--his
side his
body,
body, nor man's non-sensual side--his side reason, have been
his reason,
adequately
adequately conceived in their their essential
essential nature,
nature, man,
man, in the
prevailing
prevailing definition,
definition, remains the as as yet
yet unconceived and so
far
far undetermined animal. Modern anthropology, anthropology, which exex
ploits Nietzsche's writings
ploits Nietzsche's writings as as eagerly
eagerly as as does psychoanaly-
psychoanaly
sis, has completely misunderstood that statement,
sis, has completely statement, and
totally
totally failed
failed toto recognize
recognize its its implications.
implications. Man is is the as as
yet
yet undetermined animal; animal the rational animal has not yet
5 yet
been brought
been brought into its into its full
full nature.
nature. In order to determine
the
the nature
nature of man so
of man so far, man as
far, man as he has been must first first of
all
all be
be carried
carried beyond
beyond himself.
himself. Man so so far
far isis the last
last man in
that
that he he is is not
not able--and
able and thatthat means,
means, not not willing-to
willing to sub-
sub-
PART II
PART 59
59
ject
ject himself
himself to to himself,
himself and,
and toto despise
despise what is is despicable in in
his
his kind as as it
it is
is so
so far.
far. This is is why
why a passage
passage beyond
beyond himself
must be sought
sought for for man as as he is
is so
so far,
far, why
why the the bridge
bridge must
be found
found to to that nature by by which man can overcome his his
former
former nature,
nature, his Ms last
last nature.
nature. Nietzsche
Nietzsche envisaged
envisaged this
nature and kind of self-overcoming
self-overcoming man, man and at
?
at first
first cast
cast it
it
in the figure
figure of Zarathustra. To this this man,
man, who overcomes
himself and so so subjects
subjects himself and so so first
first determines him- him
self,
self Nietzsche gives
7 gives a name which is is easily
easily misunderstood.
misunderstood.
He calls
calls him "the superman."
superman." But Nietzsche does does not
not mean
a type
type of existing
existing man, man, onlyonly super-dimensional.
super-dimensional. Nor does does
he mean a type type of man who casts off "humanity,"
casts off "humanity/ to
5
to make
sheer caprice
caprice the law and titanic titanic rage
rage thethe rule.
rule. The super-
super
man is is the man who first first leads
leads the essential nature
the essential nature of exist-
of exist
ing
ing man over into its its truth,
truth, and so so assumes that that truth.
truth.
Existing
Existing man,
man, by by being
being thus determined and secured secured in his
in Ms
nature, is
essential nature, is to
to be rendered capable capable of of becoming
becoming the the
future master of the earth-of earth wielding to
of wielding to high
high purpose
purpose
the powers
powers that will fall to future man in
fall to in the
the nature
nature of the
of the
technological
technological transformation of of the
the earth
earth and of of human
activity.
activity. The essential
essential figure
figure of of this
this man,
man, the the superman
superman
rightly understood,
rightly understood, is is not a product of
product of an unbridled unbridled and
degenerate imagination rushing
degenerate imagination rushing headlong
headlong into into thethe void.
void.
Nor can it it be found by by way
way of historical analysis
of an historical analysis of of the
the
modern age.age. No No: the superman's
: superman's essential
essential figure
figure has been been
presaged to
presaged to Nietzsche's metaphysical thinking,
Nietzsche's metaphysical thinking, because
because hishis
thinking was capable
thinking capable of makingmaking a dear clear junction
junction with the the
antecedent fate fate ofof Western thinking.
thinking. Nietzsche's thinking
gives expression
gives expression to to something
something that that already
already exists
exists but is is still
still
concealed from current views. views. We may may assume,
assume, then,then, that
that
there, still
here and there, still invisible
invisible to to the
the public
public eye,eye, the
the super
super-
man already exists. But we must never
already exists. never looklook forfor the
the super
super-
figure and nature in
man's figure in those characters who by
those characters by aa shal
shal-
low and misconceived will will to
to power
power are are pushed
pushed to to the
the top
top
as chief functionaries
as the chief functionaries of of the
the various
various organizations
organizations in in
60 WHAT
IS CALLED THINKING?
that will
which that will to
to power
power incorporates itself. Nor is
incorporates itself. is the
the
superman a wizard who will
superman will lead
lead mankind toward aa parapara-
dise on earth.
dise earth .
.. The wasteland
"The wasteland grows to him who hides
grows;5 woe to hides wastelands
within!" Who is
within!" to whom this
is he to this cry
cry of
of "woe!" is is ad
ad-
dressed? He is
dressed? is the superman. For he who passes
the superman. passes over must
pass
pass away;
away 5 the superman's way
the superman's begins with his
way begins his passing
passing
away.
away. ByBy that
that beginning
beginning Ms his way is determined. We
way is We must
note it
note it once more: because
once more because our statement
: statement-thatthat the most
thought-provoking matter in
thought-provoking in our thought-provoking
thought-provoking time
is that
is are still
that we are still not
not thinking--is
thinking is connected with Nietz Nietz-
sche's
sche's words about the the growing wasteland, and because
growing wasteland,
these words,
these words, on the other hand,
the other are spoken
hand, are spoken with the super
super-
man in mind, we must try
in mind 7
try to
to make thethe superman's
su,perman's essential
essential
nature clear,
nature clear, to the extent
to the extent to
to which our own way way requires
requires it.
it.
Let us keep
keep clear
clear now of of those false, confusing
those false, confusing connota
connota-
tions
tions that
that the word "superman"
"superman" has to the common under
to the under-
standing.
standing. Instead,
Instead, let
let us keep
keep our minds on three simple simple
matters that seem to to suggest
suggest themselves by by the word
"superman"
"superman" understood in its plain meaning
its plain meaning: :
1.
1 .The passing
passing over.
over.
2.
2. The site
site from which the passage
passage leaves.
leaves.
3.
5. The site
site to
to which the passage goes.
passage goes.
The superman
superman goes
goes beyond, overpasses man as
beyond, overpasses as he is,
is, the
last
last man. Man,
Man, unless he stops
stops with the typetype of man as as he
is,
is, is
is a passage, a transition;
passage., transition; he isis a bridge
bridge; he is
7
is "a rope
rope
strung
strung between the animal and the superman."superman." The super-super
man,
man, strictly
strictly understood,
understood is
?
is the figure
figure and form of man to to
which he who passespasses over is
is passing over.
passing over. Zarathustra him him-
self
self is
is not yet
yet the superman,
superman, but onlyonly the
the very
very first
first to
to pass
pass
over to him he is
to him-he is the superman
superman in the process
process of becom-
becom
ing.
ing. For various reasons,
reasons, we limit our reflections
reflections here to to
this
this preliminary
preliminary figure
figure of the superman.
superman. But we must first first
give
give heed to to the passage
passage across. Next, we must give
across. Next, give closer
closer
thought
thought to to the second point,
point, the site
site of departure
departure ofof him
PART II
PAl\T 611
who crosses
crosses over-that
over that is, is how matters stand with man as
?
as
he is
is so
so far,
far, the last
last man. And third,, third, we must give give thought
to
to where he goes goes who passes across, that
passes across, that is,
is, what stance
man comes to take as as he passes across.
passes across.
The first
first point,
point, the passage across, will
passage across, will "become
become clear clear to to
us only
only as as we give
give thought
thought to to the second and third points, points,
the
the whence and the whither of the man who passes
of the passes overover and
who,
who, in passing
passing over,
over, isis transformed.
The man whom he who passes over overpasses

passes over overpasses is is man as as
he is
is so
so far.
far. To remind us of that man's essential essential definition,
definition,
Nietzsche callscalls him the as as yet
yet undetermined animal. animal. TMs This
implies:
implies: homo est rationale, "Animal"
est animal rationale. "Animal* does
7
does not
mean justjust any
any living
living being;
being$ plants, too, have life,
plants, too, yet we
life, yet
cannot callcall man a rationalrational vegetable.
vegetable. "Animal"
"Animal means 7'
beast.
beast. Man is is the beast
beast endowed with reason. reason. Reason is is the
the
perception
perception of what is, is,
which always
always means also also what can be
and ought
ought to to be.
be. To perceive implies, in
perceive implies, in ascending
ascending order: order:
to
to welcome and take in; in$ toto accept
accept and take take inin the
the encoun
encoun-
ter;
ter to
$
to take up up face toto face;
face; toto undertake and see see through
through-
and this
this means to talk through. through. The Latin for for talking
talking
through
through is reor the Greek />eo>
is reor; pew (as(as in
in rhetoric)
rhetoric) is is the ability
ability
to
to take up up something
something and see it it through
through;5 reri
reri isis ratio
ratio;$ ani
ani-
mal rationale is is the animal which lives lives by by perceiving
perceiving what
is, in the manner described. The perception
is, perception that that prevails
prevails
within reason produces
produces and adduces purposes, purposes, establishes
establishes
rules,
rules, provides
provides means and ways, ways, and attunesattunes reason to to the
modes of action.
action. Reason's perception
perception unfolds as this mani
as this mani-
fold
fold providing,
providing, which is is first
first of all
all and always
always a confronta
confronta-
tion,
tion, a a face-to-face presentation. Thus one might
face-to-face presentation. might also say:
also say :
homo est est animal rationale--man

rationale man is is the
the animal that con-
fronts
frbnts face-to-face.
face-to-face. A A mere animal,animal, such as as a dog,dog, never
confronts anything,
anything, it it can never confront anything anything to its its
face; to
face; to do so,so, the animal would have to to perceive
perceive itself.
itself. ItIt
cannot say say "I,"
"I," itit cannot talk talk atat all.
all. ByBy contrast
contrast man,
according
according to to metaphysical
metaphysical doctrine,
doctrine, is is the confronting
confronting ani ani-
mal which has the the property
property that that itit can speak.
speak. Upon this this
essential
essential definition-which
definition which is, is, however,
however, never thought thought
through
through more fully fully toto its
its roots-there
roots there isis then constructed
constructed
the doctrine
doctrine of of man as as the person, doctrine can there
person, which doctrine there-
after
after be expressed
expressed theologically.
theologically. Persona means actor's
the actor's
mask through
through which his his dramatic tale tale isis sounded. Since Since
man is is the
the percipient
percipient who perceives
perceives what is, is, we can think
of Mm as
of him as the persona, the mask,
the persona^ mask, of of Being.
Being.
Nietzsche characterizes
characterizes the last last man as prevailing man
as prevailing
in
in the process,
process, so so to
to speak,
speak, of fortifying
fortifying in in himself human
nature as as it
it is
is soso far.
far. This is is the
the reason why why the last last man
has only
only thethe remotest possibility
possibility of of passing
passing beyond
beyond himself
himself
and so so keeping
keeping himself under his his own control.
control. In this this
species
species of of last
last man,
man, therefore, reason-the
therefore., reason forming of
the forming of rep
rep-
resentational
resentational ideas-will
ideas will inevitably
inevitably perishperish in in aa peculiar
peculiar
way
way and,
and, as as it
it were,
were, become self-ensnarled.
self-ensnarled. Ideas then limit limit
themselves to
themselves to whatever happens happens to to be provided
provided at at thethe
moment-the
moment the kind of of provisions
provisions that that are
are supplied
supplied at the
at the
enterprise
enterprise and pleasurepleasure of the human manner of forming forming
ideas,
ideas, and are pleasedpleased to be generally comprehensible and
generally comprehensible
palatable.
palatable. Whatever exists, exists, appears
appears only only to to the extent to to
which it it is
is so provided, and only
so provided, only thereby
thereby admitted under
this
this tacit
tacit planning
planning of ideas,ideas, as object or a state
as an object state of things.
things.
The last man the final
last man-the final and definitive
definitive typetype of man so so far
far
-fixes
fixes himself,
himself, and generally
generally all all that is,
is, by
by a specific
specific way
way
of representing
representing ideas.ideas.
But now we must listen listen toto what Nietzsche himself has
Zarathustra say say about the last last man. Let us just just mention a
few words of it. it. They are in Prologue, section
in the Prologue? section 5, 5, of
of
They
Thus Spoke
Spoke Zarat hustra ((1883).
Zarathustra 18 8 3) . Zarathustra speaks speaks his his
prologue
prologue in the marketplace
marketplace of the town to to which he came
first, having descended from the mountains. The town "lay
first, having "lay
on the edge
edge of the forest."
forest." A A large
large crowd gathered
gathered because
they
they had been promised promised that there would be a tightrope tightrope
walker, that is,
walker, is, a man who passes across.
passes across.
One morning,
morning, Zarathustra had broken off off his
his ten-year
ten-year
PART
PA.R.T II 65
63
stay in
stay in the
the mountains to
to go
go back
back down
down among
among men.
men. Nietz
Nietz-
sche writes
sche writes: :
".
. . one morning
". . morning he rose
. rose with the dawn
with the dawn, stepped ?
before the
before the sun
sun, and spoke
spoke to
?
to it
it thus
thus: :
"
"'You great star
star, what would
would your
your happiness
happiness be
be had
*You great ?
you not
you not those for whom you
those for you shine?
shine?
"
" 'For
'For ten
ten years
years you
you have climbed to to my
my cave
cave: you
you :
tired of
would have tired of your
your light
light and of
of the
the journey
journey had it
it
"
not for me and my
not been for my eagle
eagle and mymy serpent.'
serpent.' "
These words-which
words which historically
historically reach back to to the heart
of Plato's
of metaphysics and thus go
Plato's metaphysics go to
to the
the core
core of
of Western
thought-conceal
thought the key
conceal the key to Nietzsche's Thus Spoke
to Nietzsche's Spoke Zara
Zara-
thustra. Zarathustra descended the
thustra. Zarathustra the mountains in in solitude.
solitude.
But when he came into the forest,
into the forest, he there
there met an old
hermit "who had left Ms holy
left his cottage." When Zarathustra
holy cottage."
was alone again
again after
after talking
talking toto the old man
the old man,7 he said
said to
to his
his
heart:
heart "Could it
: it be possible?
possible? This old old saint forest has
saint in the forest
not yet
yet heard anything
anything of this,this, that God is is dead" (section
(section
2)
2) . When he arrives
. arrives in the marketplace town, Zara
marketplace of the town, Zara-
thustra tries
tries directly
directly to
to teach the people
people "the superman"
superman" as
"the meaning
meaning of of the earth." But the peoplepeople only
only laughed
laughed
at
at Zarathustra,
Zarathustra, who had to realize
to realize that the time had yet
not yet
come,
come, and that this
this was not yet yet the right
right way,
way, to speak
speak at
once and straight
straight out of the highest
highest and of the future--that
future that
it
it was advisable
advisable to to speak
speak only
only indirectly
indirectly and even,
even, for the
moment,
moment, of the opposite.
opposite.
"Then II shall
shall speak
speak to
to them ofof what is is most contempti-
contempti
ble;
ble and that
^
that is
is the last
last man." Let us listen
listen only
only to a few
sentences
sentences from
from this
this speech
speech about the last man from this
last man-from this
prologue
prologue toto what Zarathustra "speaks""speaks" in his speeches
speeches
proper--to
proper to learn what this this type
type of human beingbeing is
is from
which the
the passage
passage across
across shall
shall take place.
place.
And thus
thus spoke
spoke Zarathustra
Zarathustra to
to the people
people : :
Alas,
Alas, the
the time
time is
is coming when man will no
coming when no longer
longer shoot
64 WHAT
WHAT IS
IS CALLED THINKING?
CALLED THINKING?
the arrow of Ms longing
of his longing beyond
beyond man,
man, and the string
string of
of
Ms bow will
his will have forgotten
forgotten how to
to whir!
whir . . .! . , .
Alas,
Alas, the time isis coming when man will
coming will no longer
longer give
give
birth
birth to
to a
a star.
star. Alas,
Alas, the
the time of the most despicable
despicable man
is
is coming, he that
coming, that is
is no longer able
longer able to
to despise
despise himself.
himself.
Behold,
Behold, II show you
you the last man. 'What is
the last is love?
love? What isis
creation?
creation? What is longing? What is
is longing? is aa star?'-thus
star?' thus asks
asks
the
the last
last man,
man, and he blinks.
blinks.
The earth
earth has become smaller,
smaller, and on it hops the
it hops the last
last
man who makes everything
everything small.
small. His race
race is
is as
as ineradi-
ineradi
cable
cable as
as the flea-beetle; last man lives
flea-beetle the last
5
lives longest. We
longest. 'We
4
have invented happiness'-say

happiness' say the last
last men,
men, and theythey
blink.''*
blink,"*
Summary Transition
We are trying
We toying toto look in the direction in in which Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's
thinking
thinking proceeds,
proceeds, because it is the way
it is way that
that gave
gave rise
rise to
to
the words: "The wasteland grows; grows woe to
5
to him who hides hides
wastelands within!" These words in in turn are
are supposed
supposed to to
be clarified
clarified by
by the statement: "Most thought-provoking
thought-provoking in in
our thought-provoking
thought-provoking time is that we are
is that are still
still not
not think
think-
ing." The wasteland,
ing." growing of
wasteland, the growing of the
the wasteland
wasteland-a a
curiously
curiously contradictory phrase! And the
contradictory turn of phrase! the hiding
hiding ofof
inner wastelands would be connected,
connected, then,
then, with the the fact
fact
that we are
are still
still not thinking-connected, that
thinking connected, that is,is, with the
the
long
long since dominant kind of thinking,
thinking, with thethe dominance
of ideational
ideational or representational
representational thinking.
thinking. The words of of
statement, about what is
our statement, is most thought-provoking in
thought-provoking in
our age,
age, would then hark back to to Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's words.
words. Our
*
*Translation Kaufmann, from The Portable
by Walter Kaufmann,
Translation by Portable Nietzsche,
Nietzsche, The
ViMng Press, New York,
Viking Press, York, copyright
copyright 1954.
1954.
PART II
PART 65
85
statement would join join with Nietzsche's

Nietzsche's words In in aa destiny
to
to which,
which, it it seems,
seems, our whole earth earth is is destined
destined to to its
its re
re-
motest corners. That destiny destiny ""·ill above all
will above all shake the the foun
foun-
dations
dations of all all of man's thinking, in
thinking, in dimensions
dimensions of of such
magnitude
magnitude that the demise we moderns modems are are witnessing
witnessing in in
only
only one sector, literature, is
sector, literature, is a mere episode
episode by by comparison.
comparison.
But we must not equate equate such a a shaking
shaking of of the
the foundations
foundations
with revolution and collapse. collapse. The shaking shaking of of that
that which
exists may
exists may be the way way by by which an equilibrium
equilibrium arises, arises, aa
position of rest
position rest such as as has never been been-because
because that that rest,
rest,
that
that peace,
peace, isis already
already present
present at the heart
at the heart ofof the
the shock.
shock.
No thinking,
tiiinking, therefore,
therefore, creates
creates for for itself
itself thethe element
element in in
which it it operates.
operates. But all all thinking strives, as
thinking strives, as if if automati
automati-
cally,
cally, to
to stay
stay within the the element assigned
assigned to it.
to it.
What is is the element in in which Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's thought
thought oper oper-
ates?
ates? WeWe must see see more clearly
clearly here here before
before attempting
attempting
further steps
steps along
along our way. way. We must see see that
that all those
all those
foreground
foreground things
things which Nietzsche had to to reject
reject and op op-
pose--that
pose that fundamentally
fundamentally he passes passes them all all by
by, that
?
that he
speaks
speaks only
only inin order better to preserve his
to preserve silence. He is
his silence. is the
the
first
first to pose
pose the thoughtful
thoughtful question-thoughtful
question thoughtful in in that
that itit
starts
starts from metaphysics
metaphysics and points points back to to metaphysics
metaphysics-
which we formulate as as follows:
follows Is : Is the man of of today
today in in his
his
metaphysical
metaphysical nature prepared prepared to to assume dominion over over the
the
earth asas a whole? Has the man of of today
today yetyet given
given thought
thought
in any
any way
way to to what conditions will will determine the nature of
such worldwide government?
government? Is Is the
the nature of this man of
of this of
today
today such that it it is
is fit
fit to
to manage
manage those those powers,
powers, and put put toto
use those means of power, power, which are are released
released as as the nature
of modem
modern technology
technology unfolds, forcing man to
unfolds, forcing to unfamiliar
decisions?
decisions? Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's answer to to these
these questions
questions is is No. Man
as
as he is
is today
today is is not prepared
prepared to to form and assume a world
government.
government. For today's today's man lags lags behind,
behind, not just just here and
there--no,
there no, in everything
everything he is, is, inin all
all his
his ways,
ways, he lags lags
curiously
curiously behind that which is is and has long long been.
been. That
66
66 WHAT
IS CALLED THINKING?
wMch
which really
really is,
is, Being,
Being, which
which from
from the
the start
start calls
calls and
and de
de-
termines
termines all beings,
all beings, can can never
never be be made
made out,out, however,
however, by by
ascertaining facts,
ascertaining facts, byby appealing
appealing to to particulars.
particulars. That That sound
sound
common sense
common sense which
which is is so
so often
often "cited"
"cited" in in such
such attempts
attempts is is
not as
not as sound
sound and and natural
natural as as it
it pretends.
pretends. It It is
is above
above allall not
not
as absolute
as absolute as as it
it acts,
acts, but
but rather
rather thethe shallow
shallow product
product of of that
that
manner of of forming
forming ideasideas which
which is is the
the final
final fruit
fruit of of the
the
Enlightenment in
Enlightenment in the
the eighteenth
eighteenth century. Sound common
century. Sound common
sense is
sense is always
always trimmed to to fit
fit aa certain
certain conception
conception of of what
what
is and
is and ought
ought to to be
be and may may be.be. The
The power
power of of this
this curious
curious
understanding extends
understanding into our own
extends into own ageage; but
5
but itit is
is no longer
longer
adequate. The organizations
adequate. organizations of of social
social life,
life, rearmament
rearmament in in
moral matters,
moral matters, the the grease
grease paint
paint of of the
the culture
culture enterprise
enterprise--
none ofof them any any longer
longer reach what is. is. With all all the good
good
intentions and all
intentions all the
the ceaseless
ceaseless effort,
effort, these
these attempts
attempts are no
more than
than makeshift patchwork, expedients
makeshift patchwork, expedients for for the mo mo-
ment. And why? why? Because the ideas ideas of of aims,
aims, purposes,
purposes, and
means,
means, of of effects
effects and causes,
causes, from which all all those attempts
attempts
arise--because
arise because thesethese ideas
ideas are from the start start incapable
incapable of
holding
holding themselves
themselves open open toto what is. is.
There is is the
the danger
danger that the thoughtthought of man today today will
will
fall
fall short
short of of the decisions
decisions that are coming, decisions of
coming, decisions
whose specific historical shape
specific historical shape we can know nothing nothing-that that
the
the man of of today
today willwill look for thesethese decisions where they they
can never be made.
What did did the Second World War really really decide? (We
shall
shall not mention here its its fearful consequences
consequences for for mymy
country,
country, cutcut in two.)
two.) This world war has decided nothing nothing
-ifif we here use use "decision" in so so high
high and wide a sense
that
that it
it concerns
concerns solelysolely man's essential
essential fate fate on thisthis earth.
Only
Only the things
things thatthat have
have remained undecided stand out
somewhat
somewhat moremore clearly.
clearly. But
But even
even here,
here, the danger
danger is is grow-
grow
ing
ing again
again that
that those
those matters
matters in this this undecided area which
are
are moving
moving towardtoward aa decision,
decision, and which concern world
government
government as as aa whole--that
whole that these these matters,
matters, whichwhich now now
PART II
PART 67
67
must
must be be decided,
decided, will will once
once again
again be forced
forced intointo politico-
politico-
social and moral categories
social and categories thatthat are
are inin all
all respects
respects tootoo nar-
nar
row and faint-hearted,
faint-hearted, and and thus will will be deprived
deprived of of a a pos-
pos
sible
sible befitting
befitting consideration
consideration and reflection.
reflection.
Even in in the decade from from 19201920 to to 1930,
1950, the the European
European
world of ideasideas could not cope cope anyany longer
longer with what was
then looming
looming on the horizon. What is is to
to become of of aa Europe
Europe
that wants to to rebuild itself
itself with the the stage props
stage props of
of those
those
years
years after
after World War I? I? AA plaything
plaything for the powers,
for the powers, and
for peoples. In
for the immense native strength strength of the EasternEastern peoples. In
his Twilight
Twilight of of the Idols,
Idols, or,or, How to to Philosophize
Philosophize with with a
Hammer, written in the summer of of 1888,
1 Nietzsche writes,
888, Nietzsche writes,
in the section
section "Critique
"Critique of of Modernity": "Our institutions
7'
Modernity institutions
:
are good
good forfor nothing
nothing any any more: on this this point
point all agree.
all agree.
However,
However, it it is
is not their
their fault
fault but ours. Now that
hut ours. that we have
mislaid allall the instincts
instincts from which institutions
institutions grow,
grow, we
lose
lose institutions altogether because we are
institutions altogether are no longer
longer ·good
good
for them. Democracy
Democracy has always
always been the
the form of
of decline
decline
in organizing
organizing power: power: in Human, All Too Human I, I, 549
349
((1878)
18 7 8) II already
already characterized modern democracy, democracy, to to-
gether with its
gether its mongrel
mongrel forms such as as the
the 'German Reich/ Reich,'
form of
as the form decline of
of decline of the state.
state. If
If there
there are
are to
to be institu
institu-
tions there must be a kind of will,
tions will, instinct,
instinct, imperative,
imperative,
anti-liberal
anti-liberal to to the point
point of of malice : the will
: will to
to tradition,
tradition, to to
authority, to
authority, to responsibility
responsibility for for centuries
centuries to to come,
come, to to the
solidarity of
solidarity of chains
chains ofof generations
generations forward and backward
infinitum. When that
ad infinitum. that will
will is
is present,
present, something
something like like the
the
Imperium Romanum is
Imperium is founded
founded: or: or something
something like like Russia,
Russia,
only power
the only power todaytoday that
that has endurance in in its
its bones,
bones, that
that
wait, that
can wait, that still
still can have promise
promise--Russia Russia the the counter-
counter-
concept to
concept to that
that miserable
miserable European
European particularism
particularism and nerv nerv-
ousness which has entered aa critical
ousness critical condition
condition with with the
foundation of of the German Reich. Reich. . . . The whole West
. . .
longer possesses
no longer possesses those
those instincts
instincts out
out of of which
which institutions
institutions
grow, out
grow, out of future grows
of which aa future grows: nothing
nothing else,
: else, perhaps,
perhaps,
68 WHAT
is CALLED THINKING?
goes
goes soso much against
against the grain of its
grain of its 'modern
'modem spirit.spirit.' Men
7
live
live for
for the
the day,
day, men live live very fast-men
very fast men livelive very
very irreirre-
sponsibly:
sponsibly precisely
precisely this
: this is
is called 'freedom.' The thing
called 'freedom.' thing thatthat
makes an institution
institution an institution
institution is is despised,
despised, hated,
hated, re re-
jected : men fear
jected : fear they
they areare in danger of
in danger of aa new slavery
slavery the the
moment the the word 'authority'
Authority' is is even mentioned/'
mentioned." (W.W., (W.W.,
VIII, p. 150
VIII, p. 1501). f.).
In order
In order toto forestall
forestall anyany misinterpretation
misinterpretation on the the part
part of of
sound common sense, sense, letlet it noted that
it be noted that thethe "Russia"
Nietzsche has in
Nietzsche in mind is is not identical
identical with today'stoday's political
political
and economic system system of of the Soviet republics. Nietzsche's
Soviet republics. Nietzsche's
concern is is to
to think beyond
beyond the teeming
teeming multitude
multitude of of na na-
tionalisms
tionalisms which,
which, as as he saw even then,then, are are no longer
longer viable,
viable,
and toto clear
clear the
the field
field for
for the great decisions-for
great decisions reflection
for reflection
upon these
upon these decisions.
decisions. The reason why why man is is lagging
lagging be be-
hind that
that which is, Nietzsche sees in the fact that prevail-
is, Nietzsche sees in the fact that prevail
ing
ing human nature is is still
still not fully developed and secured.
fully developed secured.
According
According to to an ancient doctrine of metaphysics, man is
of metaphysics, is the
the
rational animal. This conception,conception, which goes goes back to to thethe
Romans,
Romans, no longerlonger answers to to what the Greeks had in mind
with the name f<J>OP XoyoF A.6yov exov. According to
GXOV. According to that
that doctrine,
doctrine,
man is rising presence which can make appear
is "that rising presence appear what
is
is present."
present." In the world of Western conceptions conceptions and ideas ideas
that
that was to to follow,
follow, man becomes a a peculiarly
peculiarly constructed
constructed
combination of animality
animality and rationality.
rationality. But to to Nietzsche,
Nietzsche,
neither the nature of animality,animality, nor the the nature of of reason,
reason,
nor the proper
proper essential
essential unity
unity ofof the two,two, is is as
as yet
yet deter
deter-
mined,
mined, that is, is, established
established and secured.
secured. Therefore,
Therefore, the the two
domains of being,
being, animality
animality and rationality,
rationality, separate
separate and
clash.
clash. This rupture
rupture prevents
prevents man from possessing possessing unity unity of of
nature and thus being being free
free for
for what we normally
normally call call the
the
real.
real. Therefore,
Therefore, it it is
is a most important
important part part of of Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's
way
way of thought
thought to to go beyond man as
go beyond as he is is so
so far,
far, beyond
beyond
man in his his as
as yet
yet undetermined nature, nature, into into thethe complete
complete
determination of of his
his whole nature up up toto this
this point.
point. Funda-
PART II
PAB.T 69
6
mentally,
mentally, Nietzsche's way way of thought
thought does does notnot want to to
overthrow anything-it
anything it merely merely wants to catch catch up up to
to some-
some
thing.
thing. To the passage beyond man as
passage beyond as he isis so-
so far,
far, Nietzsche
Nietzsche
gives the much misunderstood and much abused
gives abused name
"superman."
"superman." Let me stress stress itit again:
again: the the superman
superman in in
Nietzsche's sense is is not man as as he exists
exists until
until now,
now, only
only
superdimensional.
superdimensional. The "superman""superman" does does notnot simply
simply carry
carry
the accustomed drives drives and strivings
strivings of of the
the customary
customary type type
of man beyond
beyond all all measure and bounds.
bounds. Superman
Superman is is quali
quali-
tatively,
tatively, not quantitatively,
quantitatively, different
different from existingexisting man.
The thing
thing that the superman discards is
superman discards is precisely
precisely our our
boundless,
boundless, purely
purely quantitative nonstop progress.
quantitative nonstop progress. The super super-
man is is poorer, simpler, tenderer
poorer, simpler, tenderer and tougher, tougher, quieter
quieter and
more self-sacrificing
self-sacrificing and slower slower of of decision,
decision, and more
economical of of speech.
speech. Nor does does thethe superman
superman appear appear in in
droves,
droves, oror at
at random-he
random he appears appears onlyonly after
after the
the rank
rank: order
order
has been carried
carried out.
out. ByBy rank order
order in in its
its essential
essential meaning
meaning
-notnot merely
merely in the sense of an arrangement arrangement of of existing
existing
conditions
conditions according
according to this or
to this that scale
or that scale--Nietzsche
Nietzsche un un-
derstands the standard that all all men are are not equal,
equal, that
that not
everybody
everybody has aptitude
aptitude and claim to to everything,
everything, that that not
everybody
everybody may may set set up
up his
his everyman's tribunal to
everyman's tribunal to judge
judge
everything.
everything. In a note to to his
his Zarathustra (which (which he himself
did not publish,
publish, however)
however) Nietzsche writes: writes : "The rank
order carried out, out, in a system
system of of world government:
government : the the
masters of of the
the earth lastlast of all,
all, aa new ruling
ruling caste.
caste. Arising
Arising
from them,
them, here and there, there, all Epicurean god,
all Epicurean god, thethe super
super-
man,
man, he who transfigures
transfigures existence:
existence Caesar with the
: the soul
soul of
of
Christ."
We must not pass
We pass over these words in in too
too great
great aa hurry
hurry-
especially
especially since
since they
they bring
bring to to mind other other words,
words, spoken
spoken
even more deeply
deeply and more secretly,
secretly, in in one of of Hoelderlin's
Hoelderlin's
late
late hymns:
hymns: there Christ,Christ, who is is "of still
still another nature,"
nature,"
is
is called
called the brother of of Heracles and Dionysos Dionysos--so that
so that
there isis announced here a still still unspoken gathering of
unspoken gathering of the the
whole of Western fate, fate, the gathering
gathering from which alone
the Occident can go go forth
forth to coming decisions
to meet the coming decisions-
to become,
become, perhaps
perhaps and in in a wholly
wholly other mode, mode, a land of
dawn,
dawn, an Orient.
The superman
superman constitutes
constitutes a a transformation
transformation and thus a
rejection
rejection of of man so so far.
far. Accordingly, figures who
public figures
Accordingly, the public
in
in the
the course
course of of current
current history emerge in
history emerge in the limelight
limelight
are
are as
as far
far from the the superman's
superman's nature as as is
is humanly
humanly possi possi-
ble.
ble.
In the course
course of of these lectures, we can offer
these lectures, offer no more
than a sketchy
sketchy outline
outline of the superman's essential nature,
superman's essential nature,
and even this this only
only forfor the primary
primary purpose
purpose of preventing
preventing
the
the crudest
crudest misunderstandings
misunderstandings and mistaken attitudes attitudes concon-
cerning
cerning Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's thought-and
thought and in in order
order to to show some
points
points ofof view from which we may may prepare
prepare to to take
take the
the first
first
steps
steps toward a a confrontation
confrontation with Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's thought.
thought.
The thinking
thinking of today if we may
of today-if call it
may call it that
that-lacks
lacks
nearly
nearly every
every qualification
qualification needed to to interpret
interpret the figure
figure of
Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's Zarathustra,
Zarathustra, let let alone confront Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's basicbasic
metaphysical
metaphysical doctrines;
doctrines these two tasks
5
tasks are at at bottom one.
Therefore,
Therefore, the firstfirst approach
approach to Nietzsche's writings,
writings, which
may
may easily
easily remain decisive for the future, future, encounters al al-
most insuperable
insuperable difficulties
difficulties if is made without prepara
it is
if it prepara-
tion.
tion. Especially
Especially when reading reading Thus Spoke Zarathustra, we
Spoke Zarathustra,
are only
only too ready
ready to judge what we read by
to take and judge by those
ideas which we ourselves have brought brought alongalong unnoticed.
This danger
danger is is still
still especially
especially acute for for us,
us, because Nietz Nietz-
sche's
sche's writings
writings and their publication
publication are very very close
close toto us
in time,
time, and especially
especially because their their language
language has shaped shaped
today's
today's usage strongly than we know. Still
usage more strongly Still-the closer
the closer
in time,
time, the more nearly nearly our contemporary
contemporary a thinker is, is,
the longer
longer isis the way
way to to what he has thought,
thought, and the less less
may
may we shun this this long
long way.
way. This, too, we must still
This, too, still learn,
learn,
to
to read a book such as Nietzsche's Thus Spoke Spoke Zarathustra
in the same rigorous
rigorous manner as as one of Aristotle's
Aristotle's treatises
treatises; 5
the same manner,

manner, be it it noted, identical manner.
noted, not the identical
PART I
PART 11
71
For there is is no universal schema which could be applied

appMed
mechanically
mechanically to
to the interpretation
interpretation of
of the
the writings
writings of
of think-
think
ers,
ers, or even to a single
single work of a single thinker. A dialogue
single thinker. dialogue
of
of Plato--the
Plato the Phaedrus,
Phaedrus? for for example,
example, the the conversation
conversation on
Beauty-can
Beauty can be interpreted
interpreted in totally totally different
different spheres
spheres and
respects,
respects, according
according to to totally different implications
totally different implications and
problematics.
problematics. This multiplicity
multiplicity of of possible
possible interpretations
interpretations
does not discredit
discredit thethe strictness
strictness of of the
the thought
thought content.
content. For
all
all true thought
thought remains open open to to more than one interpretainterpreta-
tion-and
tion and this
this by
by reason of of its nature. Nor is
its nature. is this
this multiplic
multiplic-
ity
ity of possible
possible interpretations
interpretations merely merely the the residue
residue of of a still
still
unachieved formal-logical
formal-logical univocityunivocity which we properly properly
ought
ought to to strive
strive for
for but did not attain. attain. Rather,
Rather, multiplicity
multiplicity
meanings is
of meanings is the element in in which all thought must move
all thought
in
in order to to be strict
strict thought.
thought. To use use an image
image : to
: to a fish,
fish, the
the
depths
depths and expanses
expanses of of its
its waters,
waters, the the currents
currents and quiet quiet
pools,
pools, warm and cold cold layers
layers are the the element of of its
its multiple
multiple
mobility. If
mobility. If the fish
fish isis deprived
deprived of of the fullness
fullness of of its
its ele
ele-
ment,
ment, if if it
it is
is dragged
dragged on the dry dry sand,
sand, then it it can onlyonly
wriggle, twitch,
wriggle, twitch, and die. Therefore, we always
die. Therefore, always must seek
out thinking,
thinking, and its its burden of thought, in
thought, in the element of
its
its multiple
multiple meanings,
meanings, else else everything
everything will will remain closed
to
to us.
us.
If
If we take up up one of Plato's dialogues, and scrutinize
Plato's dialogues, scrutinize
and judge
judge its its "content" in keeping keeping with the ways ways in in which
sound common sense forms its ideas--something
its ideas something that hap hap-
pens
pens allall too often and too too easily-we
easily we arrive
arrive at at the most
curious views,
views, and finally
finally at at the conviction
conviction that Plato must
have been a great muddleheadj because we find
great muddlehead; find-and this is
and this is
indeed correct-that
correct that not a single single one of of Plato's
Plato's dialogues
dialogues
arrives
arrives at at a palpable,
palpable, unequivocal
unequivocal result result which sound com com-
mon sense
sense could,
could, asas the saying goes, hold on to.
saying goes, to. As ifif sound
common sense--the
sense the last
last resort
resort of of those who are by by nature
envious of of thinking-as
thinking as if this common sense
if this sense whose sound sound-
ness lies
lies in itsits immunity
immunity to any problematic,
to any problematic, had ever
caught
caught on OB to anything
anything at at the source,
source, had ever ever thought
thought
through
through anything
anything from its its source!
source !
A dialogue
A dialogue of of Plato
Plato is is inexhaustible--not
inexhaustible only for
not only for pos
pos-
terity
terity and the changing
changing forms of comprehension
comprehension to to which
posterity
posterity gives
gives rise;
rise j it
it is
is inexhaustible of of itself,
itself, by
by its
its na
na-
ture.
ture. And this this isis forever
forever the mark of of all
all creativeness
creativeness-
which,
which, of of course,
course, comes only only to those who are
to those are capable
capable of of
reverence.
As we apply
apply these
these thoughts
thoughts to Nietzsche, we may
to Nietzsche, may surmise
that the manner in
that in which the last last man forms his his ideas
ideas isis
least
least fit
fit ever toto think freely
freely through
through what Nietzsche has in in
mind with the the name "superman."
"superman."
The superman
superman is is first
first of allall a man who goes goes beyond,
beyond,
who passes
passes over;
over} hence something
something of of his
his essential
essential nature is is
most likely
likely toto become discernible
discernible if if we follow for aa moment
follow for
the two aspects
aspects that
that make up up his passage.
his passage.
Where does the crossing-over
crossing-over come from, from, and where does does
it
it go?
go?
The superman
superman goes beyond man such as
goes beyond as he isis till
till now,
now,
and thus goes away from him. What kind of man is
goes away is he
whom the superman
superman leaves leaves behind? Nietzsche describes
man so so far as as the last
last man. "The last last man" is is the type
type ofof
man that immediately
immediately precedes appearance of the super
precedes the appearance super-
man. The last last man,
man, therefore,
therefore, can be seen seen for what he is is
only
only with reference to to the superman,
superman, and only only after
after the
the
superman's
superman's appearance.
appearance. But we shall find the super
shall never find super-
man as long as
as long as we look for him in the places places of remote-con
remote-con-
trolled
trolled public
public opinion
opinion and on the the stock
stock exchanges
exchanges of of the
culture business
business-all all those places
places where the the last
last man,
man, and
none but he, he, controls operation. The superman
controls the operation. superman never
appears
appears in the noisy noisy parades alleged men of power,
parades of alleged power, nor
in the well-staged
well-staged meetings politicians. The superman's
meetings of politicians. superman's
appearance
appearance is is likewise inaccessible
inaccessible to to the teletypers
teletypers and
radio dispatches
dispatches of the press press which presentpresent-that is, repre
that is, repre-
sent-events
sent events to to the public
public even before they they have happened.
happened.
This well made-up
made-up and well staged staged manner of of forming
forming
FART
PART II 73
75
ideas, of
ideas, of representation,
representation, with its
with its constantly
constantly more
more refined
refined
mechanism, dissimulates
mechanism, dissimulates and blocks
blocks from view view what
what really
really
is. And this
fs. this dissimulation
dissimulation and "blocking
blocking is is not
not just
just incidental,
incidental,
but is
is done on the principle
principle of
of aa way
way of of forming
forming ideas
ideas whose
whose
rule is
rule is all-pervading.
all-pervading. This type
type of of dissimulating
dissimulating ideas
ideas is
is al
al-
ways supported
ways supported byby sound common sense.sense. The Johnny
Johnny onon the
the
spot, in
spot, in every area
every area including
including thethe literature
literature industry,
industry, is
is the
famous "man in in the
the street/'
street," always
always available
available in
in the required
required
quantities. Faced with this
quantities. this dissimulating
dissimulating type
type of
of representa
representa-
tional ideas,
tional ideas, thinking
thinking finds
finds itself
itself in
in aa contradictory
contradictory position,
position.
This Nietzsche
This Nietzsche saw clearly.
clearly. On the hand, the common
the one hand,
ideas
ideas and views must be shouted at at when they
they want toto set
set
themselves up
themselves up asas the judges
judges ofof thought^
thought, so so that men will
will
wake up.
up. On thethe other hand, thinking
other hand, thinking can never tell tell its
its
thoughts by
thoughts by shouting.
shouting. Next to to the words of Nietzsche quoted
quoted
earlier, ear-smashing and drum clatter,
earlier, about ear-smashing clatter, we must then
set
set those
those others
others which run : "It: is the
"It is the stillest that bring
stillest words that bring
on the storm. Thoughts
Thoughts that come on doves' feet feet guide
guide the
world." (Thus
(Thus Spoke
Spoke Zarathustra,
Zarathustra^ Part II, II, "The stillest
stillest
hour").
hour") .
Indeed,
Indeed, Nietzsche never did publish publish what he really really
thought
thought after
after Zarathustra--something
Zarathustra something we tend to over over-
look.
look. All his
his writings
writings after Zarathustra are polemics; polemics; they
they
are outcries.
are outcries. What he really thought
really thought became known only
only
through
through the largely
largely inadequate posthumous publications.
inadequate posthumous publications.
From all
all that has here been suggested,
suggested, it should be clear
it dear
that
that one cannot read Nietzsche in a haphazard haphazard way; way 5 that
each one of his his writings
writings has itsits own character and limits; limits;
and that the most important important works and labors of his Ms
thought,
thought, which are are contained in his posthumous
posthumous writings,
writings,
make
make demands
demands to to which
which we we are equal. It
are not equal. It is
is advisable,
advisable,
therefore,
therefore, that
that you
you postpone
postpone reading
reading Nietzsche for for the
time
time being,
being, and
and first
first study
study Aristotle forfor ten to fifteen years.
years.
How doesdoes Nietzsche describe
describe the man whom he who
passes
passes over
over overpasses?
overpasses? Zarathustra says says in his prologue:
prologue:
"Behold!
"Behold II show
show you
!
you the
the last
last man."
man."
LECTURE
VII
·-·
Listen
Listen close!
closelyy: "The last
: last man lives longest." What does
lives longest." does that
that
say?
say? ItIt says
says that
that under the last dominion, which has
last man's dominion,
now begun,
begun, we are by by no means approaching
approaching an end, end, aa
final
final age,
age, but that last man will
that the last will on the contrary
contrary have aa
strangely
strangely long staying-power. And on what grounds?
long staying-power. grounds? Ob Ob-
viously
viously on the groundsgrounds of his type type of nature,
nature, which alsoalso
determines the way way and the "how" in which everything is,
everything zs,
and in which everything
everything is is taken toto be.
be.
For the animal rationale,
rationale, this type
type of nature consists
consists in
the way
way he setssets up
up everything
everything that is, is, as
as his
his objects
objects and sub
sub-
jective
jective states,
states, confronts them, adjusts to
them, and adjusts to these objects
objects
and states
states asas his environing circumstances. What sort
his environing sort of
of
ideas are they they with which the last last man is is concerned?
Nietzsche says says itit clearly,
clearly, but he does not discuss discuss further
what he says says in the wayway in which we now raise raise the ques
ques-
tion.
tion. What type type of idea-forming
idea-forming is is it last men
it in which the last
linger?
linger? The last last men blink.
blink. What does that mean? Blink is
does that is
related to Middle EnglishEnglish blenchen,
blenchen, which means deceive, deceive,
and toto blenken,
blenken, blinken,
blinken, which means gleam glitter. To
gleam or glitter.
blink-that
blink that means to playplay upup and setset up
up a glittering
glittering decep
decep-
tion which is is then agreed upon
agreed upon as as true and valid
valid-with the
with the
mutual tacit
tacit understanding
understanding not to to question
question the setup.
setup. Blink
Blink-
ing:
ing the mutual setup,
:
setup, agreed upon and in the end no longer
agreed upon longer
74
PART
PAI\.T II 75
75
in need of
in of explicit
explicit agreement,
agreement, of
of the
the objective
objective and static
surfaces and foreground
surfaces foreground facets
facets of
of all
all things
things as
as alone
alone valid
valid
valuable--a
and valuable setup with whose
a setup help man carries
whose help carries on
on and
degrades everything.
degrades everything.

Summary Transition
find what Nietzsche
To find Nietzsche reallyreally thought
thought is is as
as difficult as it
difficult as it
to lose
is to
is lose it.
it. The difficulty
difficulty cannot be removed in in a few hours
of lectures.
of lectures. But it it can be pointed
pointed out.
out. In In fact
fact, a pointer
7
pointer isis
needed, if
needed, only for
if only for the reason that that we men of of today
today hardly
hardly
know what it takes to
it takes to gain access to
gain access to a thinker,
thinker, especially
especially
one so close to
so close to us
us in
in time as Nietzsche. The following
as Nietzsche. following reflec
reflec-
tions,
tions, however,
however, concern the the way
way of of access
access to to the
the tradition
tradition of
thinking
thinking generally.
generally. The best best and basically
basically onlyonly manner to to
find out is
find is to
to go
go that
that way.
way. But it it takes
takes the
the devotion
devotion of almost
a life
life time. The thinkers'thinkers' thought
thought is is laid
laid down in books.
Books are books. The only only allowance we make for books
in philosophy
philosophy is is that they
they may difficult to
may be difficult to read.
read. But one
book is is not like
like another, especially not when we are con
another, especially con-
cerned with reading reading aa "Book for Everyone Everyone and No One."
And that is is here our concem.concern. For we cannot get get around
the necessity
necessity of of finding
finding Nietzsche first, first, in order that we
may
may then lose lose him in in the sense earlier. Why? Be-
sense defined earlier. Be
cause Nietzsche's
thinking givesgives voice and language
language to what
now is--but
is but in aa language
language in which the two-thousand-
year-old
year-old tradition
tradition of Westem Western metaphysics
metaphysics speaks,speaks, aa lan-
lan
guage
guage which we all all speak,
speak, which Europe Europe speaks-though
speaks though
in
in aa form transposed
transposed more than once, once, timeworn,
timeworn, shallowed,
shallowed,
threadbare,
threadbare, and rootless.rootless. Plato and Aristotle speak speak in what
is
is still
still our language
language of of today.
today. Parmenides and Heraclitus, Heraclitus,
too, think in
too, in what is is still
still our realm of ideas. But an appeal appeal
is
is made to to modern man's historical awareness in order to
man's historical to
make us believe
believe thatthat those
those men are are museum pieces pieces of in-
in
tellectual
tellectual history,
history, which
which can can occasionally
occasionally be placed placed back on
76
exhibit
exhibit by by a display
display of scholarship. And since
of scholarship. since we hardlyhardly
know on what the the nature of rests, we naturally
language rests,
of language naturally
take the view that that our motorcycle,
motorcycle, for for example,
example, standing
standing on
the parking
parking lot lot behind the university,
university, is is more real real than aa
thought
thought of Plato about l0€
of Plato a, or
tSca, or Aristotle lvipyet.a:
Aristotle about ei>pyta:
thoughts
thoughts which speak speak to to us
us still to-day in
still to-day in every
every scientific
scientific
concept-and
concept and not only only there--and
there and make theirtheir claim on us, us,
though
though we pay pay no attention
attention to this relation,
to this relation, hardly
hardly give
give itit aa
thought.
thought.
People
People still
still hold the view that that what is is handed down
to
to us byby tradition
tradition is is what in reality lies
in reality lies behind us us-while
while
in
in fact
fact itit comes toward us because because we are are itsits captives
captives
and destined
destined to to it.
it. The purely historical
purely historical view of of tradition
tradition
and the
the course
course of of history
history is is one of of those
those vast
vast self-deceptions
self-deceptions
in
in which we must remain entangled entangled as as long
long as as we areare still
still
not really
really thinking.
thinking. That self-deception
self-deception about history history prepre-
vents us from hearinghearing the languagelanguage of thinkers. We
of the thinkers.
do not hear it it rightly, because we take that that language
language to to be
rightly,
mere expression,
expression, setting
setting forth philosophers'
philosophers' views.views. But the the
thinkers'
thinkers' language
language tells tells what is. is. To hear it it is
is in no casecase
easy. Hearing
easy. Hearing it presupposes that we meet a
it presupposes a certain
certain require
require-
ment,
ment, and we do so so only occasions. We
only on rare occasions. We must acknowl
acknowl-
edge and respect
edge respect it.it. To acknowledge and respect
acknowledge respect consists
consists in in
letting
letting every thinker's thought
every thinker's thought come to to us as
as something
something in in
each case
case unique,
unique, never to repeated, inexhaustible
to be repeated, inexhaustible--and and
being
being shaken to to the depths
depths by by what is is unthought
unthought in in his
his
thought. What is
thought. Wbat is unthought in a
unthought a thinker's
thinker's thought
thought is is not
not aa
lack inherent in in his
his thought.
thought. What is is z/rc-thought
un-thought is is there in in
each case only only as as the un-thought.
wa-thought. The more original original the the
thinking,
thinking, the richerricher will will be what is is unthought
unthought in it. it. The
unthought
unthought is is the greatest gift that
greatest gift that thinkingthinking can bestow. bestow.
But to commonplaces of sound common sense,
to the commonplaces sense, what is is
unthought
unthought in any any thinking
thinking always
always remains merely merely the the inin-
comprehensible.
comprehensible. And to to the common comprehension,
comprehension, the the
incomprehensible
incomprehensible is is never an occasion
occasion to to stop
stop and look look at at
PART
PART II 77
7?
its own powers

its powers of of comprehension,
comprehension, still less less to notice
notice their
iim.itations. To the
limitations. the common comprehension,
comprehension, what is is incom
incom-
prehensible remains foreTer
prehensible forever merely
merely offensive
offensive--proof proof
enough
enough to
to such
such comprehension,
comprehension, which is
is convinced
convinced it
it was
comprehending everything,
born comprehending everything, that that it is now being
it is being im im-
posed upon
posed upon with an untruth and sham. The one thing thing of
which sound common sense sense is least capable
is least capable is is acknowledg
acknowledg-
ment and respect.
respect. For acknowledgment
acknowledgment and respect respect call
call for
for
a readiness
a readiness to to let
let our own attempts
attempts at thinking be over
at thinking over-
turned, again
turned, again and again, again, byby what is is raithought
unthought in the
thinkers' thought.
thinkers' thought. Someone who knew better, better, Kant,
Kant, here
spoke
spoke of of a a "falling
"falling down." But no one can fall fall down who
does not stand
does stand upright, standing upright
upright, and standing upright walks,
walks, and
walking stays
walking upon the
stays upon the way.
way. The way way leads
leads necessarily
necessarily into into
face-to-face
face-to-face converse
converse with the thinkers.
thinkers. It It is necessary
is not necessary
here,
here, however,
however, to to conceive
conceive ofof this converse historically.
this converse historically. For
instance,
instance, if if we were to to give
give out grades
grades by by the standards of
the history
history of of philosophy,
philosophy, Kant's historical
historical comprehension
comprehension
of
of Aristotle
Aristotle and Plato Plato would have to to get
get a straight
straight "F." Yet
Kant and only only Kant has creatively
creatively transformed Plato's Plato's
doctrine
doctrine of of ideas.
ideas.
One thing
thing is is necessary,
necessary, though,
though, for for a face-to-face
face-to-face con con-
verse with the thinkers
verse clarity about the manner in
thinkers:: clarity
which we encounter them. Basically, Basically, there are only only two
possibilities: either to go to
possibilities either to go
: to their encounter,
encounter, or to to go coun-
go coun
ter to them. If
ter to If we want to to go
go to
to the encounter of a thinker'sthinker's
thought, still further what is
thought, we must magnify magnify still is great in
great in
him. Then we will will enter
enter into
into what is unthought in his
is unthought
thought. If
thought. If we wish only only toto gogo counter to a thinker's thinker's
thought,
thought, this this wish must have minimized beforehand what
is
is great
great inin him. We then shift his thought
shift his thought into the common-common
places
places of of our know-it-all presumption. It
know-it-all presumption. It makes no differ- differ
ence
ence ifif we assert
assert in in passing
passing that Kant was nonetheless a
very
very significant thinker. Such praises
significant thinker.
praises from below are always always
an insult.
insult.
78 WHAT
IS CALLED THINKING?
We could leave sound common sense
We sense to to its
its own devices
devices
if its
its obstinacy
obstinacy did not again again and againagain crop crop up up within
ourselves,
ourselvesy even when we make mate every
every effort
effort to to abandon the the
commonplace,
commonplace7 the obvious as as the standard of of thinking.
thinking. We
could ignore
ignore the stubbornness
stubbornness of of sound common sense, sense, ifif
only
only itit would not spread itself so, particularly
spread itself so, particularly in in the case
the case
of Nietzsche.
Nietzsche. For notwithstanding
notwithstanding many many exaggerations
exaggerations and
dark allusions,
allusions, everything
everything Nietzsche offers offers to to our thought
thought
looks largely
largely asas ifif it
it were perfectly obvious
perfectly obvious-including including
even the book Thus Spoke Spoke Zarathustra,
Zarathustra^ including
including even his his
doctrine of the the superman.
superman. But that that is pure illusion.
is pure illusion. The
doctrine of the superman,
superman, which by by its nature can never be
its nature be
an anthropology,
anthropology, belongs,
belongs, like
like every metaphysical doctrine
every metaphysical doctrine
of man,
man, among
among the basicbasic doctrines
doctrines of every metaphysics;
of every metaphysics; it it
belongs
belongs to to the
the doctrine
doctrine of of the Being of
the Being beings. One might
of beings. might
ask,
ask, then,
then, why
why we do not at at once present
present Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's doc doc-
trine
trine of the superman
superman in the light of his
light of his basic
basic metaphysical
metaphysical
Being. We
doctrine of Being. We do not, for two reasons
not, for reasons : first,
: Nietz-
first, Nietz
sche himself presents
presents hishis basic metaphysical
metaphysical doctrine,
doctrine, hishis
doctrine of the Being
Being of beings, through the
beings, through the doctrine
doctrine of thethe
superman,
superman, in in keeping
keeping with the unequivocal trend of
the unequivocal of all
all
modern metaphysics;
metaphysics; and second,second, we of of today,
today, despite
despite our
interest in metaphysics
metaphysics and ontology,
ontology, are are scarcely
scarcely ableable any
any
longer
longer properly
properly to to raise
raise even the question of
the question of the
the Being
Being ofof
beings-to
beings raise it
to raise it in a way
way which will will put
put inin question
question our
own being
being so that it
so that it becomes questionable
questionable in in its
its relatedness
relatedness
to Being,
to Being, and thereby
thereby open to Being.
open to Being.
It now becomes possible
It possible to
to answer aa question
question raised
raised rere-
peatedly about this
peatedly this lecture series. When we hazarded here
lecture series. here
a reference
reference to to Nietzsche*s thought,
thought, and chose chose his his doctrine
doctrine of of
superman, we did not at
the superman, at all propose an attempt
all propose attempt to to rein
rein-
terpret, transform and dissolve
terpret, Nietzsche's metaphysics
dissolve Nietzsche's metaphysics
into doctrine of human nature,
into a doctrine nature, into
into an "existential
"existential an an-
thropology"-as
thropology" though Nietzsche had inquired
as though inquired only only about
about
man, and merely
man, merely on occasion
occasion and incidentally
incidentally touched on
PART
PAB.T II 79
79
the question
the question of
of the Being
Being of
of beings.
beings. Conversely,
Conversely, aa presen
presen-
tation of
tation of Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's doctrine
doctrine of
of the Being of
the Being of beings
beings could
never undertake to
never treat Ms
to treat his doctrine
doctrine of
of the
the superman
superman asas
merely incidental,
merely incidental, still
still less
less push
push it
it aside
aside as
as a position
position he
he
presumably abandoned.
presumably abandoned.
Every philosophical
Every philosophical-that is, thoughtful
that is, thoughtful--doctrine
doctrine of
man's essential
essential nature is in itself
is in alone aa doctrine
itself alone doctrine of
of the
Being of
Being of beings.
beings. Every
Every doctrine
doctrine of
of Being
Being is in itself
is in itself (done
alone
a doctrine
a doctrine of of man's essential
essential nature.
nature. But neither
neither doctrine
doctrine
can be
can be obtained
obtained by by merely
merely turning
turning the
the other
other one around.
Why this
Why this is
is so,
so, and generally the question
generally the question of of this
this relation
relation
existing
existing between man's nature nature and the Being of
the Being of beings
beings-
this is
this is in
in fact the one single
fact the single question
question which all all traditional
traditional
thinking must first
thinking first be brought
brought to
to face,
face; aa question
question which was
still unknown even to
still Nietzsche. But it
to Nietzsche. it is
is a question
question ofof
abysmal
abysmal difficulty,
difficulty, simply
simply because our seemingly
seemingly correct
correct
posing of
posing question in
of the question in fact
fact muddles the question
question funda
funda-
mentally.
mentally. We We ask what the relation isis between man's nature
and the Being
Being of beings.
beings. But-as
But as soon as as II thoughtfully
thoughtfully
say
say "man's nature,"
nature," II have already
already said
said relatedness to
Being.
Being. Likewise,
Likewise, as as soon as as II say
say thoughtfully:
thoughtfully: Being
Being of
beings,
beings, the
the relatedness
relatedness to to man's nature has been named.
Each of the two members of the relation between man's
nature and BeingBeing already
already implies
implies the relation itself.
itself. To
speak
speak to
to the heart ofof the matter:
matter there is
: is no such thing
thing here
as
as members of of the relation,
relation, nor the relation as Ac
as such. Ac-
cordingly,
cordingly, the situation
situation we have named between man's
nature
nature and the Being
Being of beings maneu
beings allows no dialectical maneu-
vers
vers in
in which one member of the relation is is played
played off
against
against the other.
other. This state
state of affairs-not
affairs not only
only that all
all
dialectic
dialectic fails
fails in
in this
this case,
case, but that there is is simply
simply no place
place
left
left for
for aa failure
failure ofof this
this kind-is
kind is probably
probably what is is most
offensive
offensive toto today's
today's habits
habits of idea-forming
idea-forming and most unset- unset
tling
tling to
to the skilled
skilled acrobats of of its
its empty
empty astuteness.
astuteness.
No way
No way of of thought,
thought, notnot even
even the wayway of metaphysical
metaphysical
thought, begins with man's essential

thought, begins essential nature
nature and goes goes on
from there to to Being,
Being, nor in reverse from Being
in reverse Being and then
back to
to man. Rather,
Rather, every
every way
way of of thinking takes its
thinking takes its may
way
already within the total
already total relation
relation ofof Being
Being and man's nature, nature,
or else
else it
it is
is not thinking at
thinking at all. oldest axioms of
all. The oldest of West
West-
ern thought,
thought, of of which we shall hear more,
shall hear more, already
already state
state
this
this fact.
fact. This is is why
why Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's way,way, too,
too, isis so
so marked
almost from the start.
start. To show it it quickly
quickly and unmistakably,
unmistakably,
rather
rather than by by long-winded
long-winded explications,
explications, I I quote
quote the
the first
first
and the last sentence
the last sentence from the "autobiography" which the
the "autobiography" the
nineteen-year-old
nineteen-year-old Nietzsche
Nietzsche wrote in in his
his student
student days
days at at
Schulpforta.
Schulpforta. Schulpforta,
Schulpforta, near NaumburgNaumburg on on. the
the river
. river
Saale,
Saale, was one of of the
the most famous and influential
influential schools
schools
of
of nineteenth-century
nineteenth-century Germany.
Germany. The manuscript
manuscript of of this
this
autobiography
autobiography was found in 1935, in
in 1955, in aa chest
chest inin the
the attic
attic
of the
of Nietzsche Archives in
the Nietzsche in Weimar. In In 1936
1956 it it was pub
pub-
lished
lished in a facsimile
facsimile brochure,
brochure, as as aa model for for the
the young.
young.
That brochure has long long since gone
gone out of of print
print and is is for
for-
gotten.
gotten. The first
first sentence in hishis description
description of of his
his life
life upup
to
to that time reads : :
"I was born asas a plant

plant near the
the churchyard, as a man
churchyard, as
in aa pastor's
in pastor's house."
The last
last sentence reads : :
"Thus man grows

grows out of everything
everything that once em
that once em-
him he has no need to
braced him; 5
to break the
the shackles
shackles-they
they
fall
fall away
away unforeseen,
unforeseen, when a
a god
god bids
bids them
them; and where
5
is
is the ring that in the end still
ring still encircles
encircles him? Is
Is it
it the
the
world? Is
Is it
it God?"
Even the later Nietzsche, the man who,

later Nietzsche, who, in
in the
the last
last year
year
of his creativity
creativity and after
after losing balance more than
losing balance than once,
once,
terrible book The Antichrist,
wrote the terrible Antichrist, was still
still asking the
asking the
same question-if
question only we can and will
if only will read
read it.
it. However
However-
to hear this
this questioning, close to
questioning, to come close to his
his ways
ways ofof
PART
PAB. T II 81
81
thought, one requires

thought, requires here
here to
to respect
respect and to
to acknowledge.
acknowledge.
Respecting acknowledging are
Respecting and acknowledging are not
not yet
yet agreement;
agreement; but
it is
it is the
the necessary
necessary precondition
precondition for
for any
any confrontation.
confrontation.
Nietzsche's way
Nietzsche*s way is
is marked with
with the
the name "the
"the superman."
superman."
LECTURE
VIII
·-·
The supe:nnan
superman is is the man who passes
passes over, away from man
over, away
as
as he is
is so
so far, away whereto? Man so
far ? but away so far
far is
is the
the last
last
man. But if if this
this manner of living being, "man,"
living being, "man," in in distinc
distinc-
tion
tion from other livingliving beings earth, plants
beings on earth, plants and animals,
animals,
is
is endowed with "rationality";
"rationality "5 and if
if ratio,
ratio, the power
power to to
perceive
perceive and reckon with things, things, isis at
at bottom a way way of
forming
forming ideas; particular manner of the last
ideas then the particular
j
last man
particular manner of forming
must consist in a particular forming ideas.ideas.
Nietzsche calls
calls it
it blinking,
blinking, without relating
relating blinking
blinking ex ex-
plicitly
plicitly to
to the nature of representing idea-fo:nning, with
representing or idea-forming, with-
out inquiring
inquiring into the essential
essential sphere,
sphere, and above all all the
es"!ential
estential origin,
origin, of representational ideas. But we must
representational ideas.
nonetheless givegive its
its full
full weight
weight toto the term
te:nn Nietzsche uses
for this
this kind of ideation,
ideation, namely, blinking, according
namely, blinking, according to to
the context in which it appears. We
it appears. We must not take it it to
to be
the same thing
thing asas the merely
merely superficial incidental wink
superficial and incidental
by
by which we signalsignal to each other on specialspecial occasions that
in fact we are no longerlonger taking seriously what is
taking seriously is being
being said
said
and proposed,
proposed, and what goes general. This kind of
goes on in general.
winking
winking can spreadspread only
only because all all forming
fo:nning of of ideas
ideas isis
itself
itself a kind of blinking.
blinking. Ideas formed
fo:nned in thisthis way
way present
present
and propose
propose of everything
everything only glitter, only
only the glitter, only the appear-
appear
ance of surfaces and foreground
foreground facets.
facets. Only
Only what is
is so pro-
so pro-
82
FAET II
PART 83
85
posed and so
posed so disposed
disposed has currency.
currency. 1bis type of
This type of representa
representa-
tion is not first
tion is first created
created by by blinking, the other
other wayway
blinking, but the
:
blinking is
around : the blinking is a consequence
consequence of of a type
type of of repre
repre-
sentation
sentation already
already dominant. What type? type? The type type that
that
constitutes
constitutes the metaphysical
metaphysical basisbasis of
of the
the age
age called
called the
the
Modern Age,
Age, which is is not ending now but only
ending only just begin-
just begin
ning,
ning since
since the Being
Being that
that prevails in it
prevails in it is only now unfold
is only unfold-
ing
ing into
into the predestined
predestined totality beings. This metaphysi
of beings.
totality of metaphysi-
cal
cal basis
basis of
of the modem
modern age age cannot be explained
explained in in aa few
sentences.
sentences. II refer
refer you
you toto a lecture
lecture II gave
gave here in in 1958,
1958,
published
published in iny book Timber Tracks
in my Tracks under thethe title
title "The
Time ofof the World View."
View/'
"We have invented happiness, say the
happiness, say the last
last men,
men, and
blink."
blink."
We shall
We shall see
see toto it
it from every angle, with the
every angle, the aid
aid ofof our
sociology,
sociology, psychology
psychology and psychotherapy,
psychotherapy, and by by some
other means besides,
besides, that all all men areare soon
soon placed
placed in in identi
identi-
cal
cal conditions of identical
identical happiness
happiness in in the
the identical
identical way,way,
and that the identity
identity of the welfare of all men is
of all secured.
is secured.
Yet,
Yet, despite
despite this happiness, man is
this invention of happiness, is driven from
one world war into into the next.
next. With a a wink thethe nations
nations areare
informed that
that peace
peace is is the elimination of of war,
war, but that that
meanwhile thisthis peace
peace which eliminates
eliminates war can be secured
only
only by
by war. Against
Against thisthis war-peace,
war-peace, in turn, we launch a
in turn,
peace
peace offensive
offensive whose attacks
attacks can hardly
hardly be called
called peaceful.
peaceful.
War the securing
War--the securing of peace;peace and peace
5
peace--the the elimination
of war. How is is peace
peace toto be secured by by what it it eliminates?
eliminates?
Something
Something is is fundamentally
fundamentally out of of joint
joint here,
here, or or perhaps
perhaps
it
it has never yet yet been in in joint. Meanwhile, "war" and
joint. Meanwhile,
"peace"
"peace" are
are still
still like
like the two sticks that savages
sticks that savages rub together
together
to
to make fire.
fire. Meanwhile,
Meanwhile, the last last man must move in a
realm of
of ideas
ideas which blinkblink atat everything
everything and can do nothing nothing
else
else but blink,
blink, in consequence
consequence of of an unearthly
unearthly fate fate that
that for
for-
bids
bids modern man to to look
look beyond himself and his
beyond himself his type
type of
84 WHAT THINKING?
CALLED' THINKING?
WHAT IS CALLED
ideas.
ideas. He has no BO other choice but to to search amongamong his his type
type
of ideas-blinking---for
ideas blinking for the fonn
form of those
those measures that
are toto create
create a world order. order. The congresses
congresses and confer- confer
ences,
ences, committees and sub-committees-are
sub-committees are theythey any-
any
thing
thing other than the blinking organizations of blinking
blinking organizations blinking
arrangements
arrangements of distrust
distrust and treachery?
treachery? Any Any decision in
in
this
this realm of of ideas
ideas must by by its
its very
very nature fall fall short.
short. Even
so,
so, man cannot settle settle down,
down, in in indecision,
indecision, to to a sham peace peace
and security.
security. Still,
Still, the source of of man's inner fragmentation
fragmentation
remains shrouded in in the shadows of of an unearthly
unearthly world
destiny.
destiny. That shroud itself itself is further covered up
is further up byby the
the
predorrrinance
predominance of publicity,
publicity, so that the
so that the fracture
fracture of of his
his frag-
frag
mentation does not yet yet reach down to
to man in
in his essence,
his essence,
despite
despite allall the unspeakable
unspeakable suffering,
suffering, all all the
the distress
distress that
that
all
all too many
many men endure. The pain pain that
that rises
rises from the the rift
rift
of that which is, is, does not yet yet reach man in in his
his essence.
essence.
What did we say say atat the end of the the first lecture? "We feel
first lecture? feel
no pain
pain.. . . .."
. . "
After all
all that has been said, said, could it it be that
that this
this blinking
blinking
way of forming
forming ideas lies beyond the reach of
lies beyond of man's
mere whims,
whims, even his his carelessness? Could it it be that there
prevails in that realm a peculiar
prevails relation regarding
peculiar relation regarding that that
which is, is, a relation
relation that reaches beyond beyond man? Could this this
relation be of such a kind that it will not allow man to
it will to let
let
Being
Being in its its essence
essence be?
Could it it be that thisthis way
way of forming ideas
of forming ideas doesdoes indeed
face what is, is, does indeed face beings, beings, and yet yet at at bottom
opposes everything that is
opposes everything is and as as it
it is?
is? Could it it be that
that this
this
manner of formingforming ideasideas at bottom sets sets upon
upon everything
everything it it
sets before itself,
itself, in order to to depose decompose it?
depose and decompose it? What
manner of thinking
thinking is is it
it that
that sets
sets all
all things
things up up inin such
such aa
way that fundamentally
fundamentally it it pursues
pursues and sets sets upon
upon them?
What is is the spirit this manner of
spirit of this of representation?
representation? What
type of
type of thinking
thinking is is it
it that in thought
thought pursues
pursues everything
everything in in
this manner? Of what kind is
this is the pursuit
pursuit of of thought
thought by by
man so so far?
PABT
PART II 85
Nietzsche gives
Nietzsche gives us
us an
an answer
answer concerning
concerning thatthat way
way of
of
forming ideas
forming ideas which
which prevails
prevails from
from the the start
start and pervades
pervades
all of
all of the
the last
last man's
man's blinking. It isis in
blinking. It in the
the third section from
third section from
the end
the end of Part Two
of Part Two ofof Thus
Thus Spoke
Spoke Zarathustra
Zarathustra (1883),
(1883),
entitled "On
entitled "On Deliverance."
Deliverance." There
There ititsays
says::
"The spirit
"The spirit of
of revenge,
revenge, mymy friends,
friends, has
has so far been
so far been
the subject
the subject of
of man's
man's best
best reflection
reflection;$ and
and wherever
wherever there
there
was suffering^
was suffering, there
there punishment
punishment waswas also
also wanted."
wanted."
To "wreak revenge/*
To revenge," the the Middle
Middle English
English wreken,
wreken, the
the
German Rache,
German Rache, the Latin urgere
the Latin urgere--all signify "to
all signify "to press
press
close and hard/
close hard," "drive/'
7
"drive," "drive
"drive out/
out," "banish/"
7
"banish," "pursue."
"pursue."
The pursuit
pursuit ofof thought,
thought, thethe formation
formation of of ideas of man
ideas of man so
so
far is
far is determined
determined by by revenge,
revenge, the onset,
onset, the attack. But
the attack. But if
if
Nietzsche wants to
Nietzsche to get away from man so
get away far and
so far his form
and his
of ideas,
of ideas, and go go on toto another
another and higher man, what then
higher man,
will
will be
be the bridge which leads
the bridge leads to
to the way
way passing
passing across?
across?
In
In what direction
direction does
does Nietzsche's point when he
thought point
Nietzsche's thought he
seeks
seeks that
that bridge
bridge toto get
get away
away from the lastlast man, and across
across
to the
to the superman?
superman? What was this thinker's true and one and
this thinker's
only an
only thought,
thought, which he thought thought even if if he did
did not
not an-
nounce
nounce it it on every
every occasion
occasion or always
always in the same way?
Nietzsche
Nietzsche gives the answer in the same Part Two of
gives the
of Thus
Spoke
Spoke Zarathustra,
Zarathustra, in in the
the section
section "On the Tarantulas":
Tarantulas" :
"For
"For that man be
that man be delivered
delivered from that is the
from revenge:
revenge: that is the
bridge rainbow after

bridge toto the
the highest
highest hope
hope for
for me,
me, and
and aa rainbow after
long
long storms."
storms."
Summary
Summary and
and Transition
Transition
We ask
We ask: What
What is
: is called
called thinking
thinking? ?-and we talk
and we about
talk about
Nietzsche.
Nietzsche. This
This observation
observation is is correct,
correct, and
and yet
yet in
in error
error
because
because it
it blinds
blinds usus to
to what
what isis being
being said.
said. Hence, what is
Hence, what is
being talked about and what isis being

being talked about and what being said
said are
are not
not identical.
identical.
We may
We may have
have aa correct
correct idea
idea of
of what
what is
is being
being talked
talked about,
about,
86 WHAT
IS CALLED THINKING?
and yetyet may

may not
not have letlet ourselves
ourselves become involved
involved inin
what is is being said. What is
being said. is being
being said
said is
is what Nietzsche
Nietzsche
is
is thinking. As a
thinking. a thinker,
thinker, he thinks
thinks what isis,7 in
in what respect
respect
it is,
it is, and in
in what way
way it is. He thinks
it is. thinks that
that which is, is, particu
particu-
lar beings
lar beings in
in their
their Being.
Being. The thinkers'
thinkers' thinking
thinking would
thus be the
thus the relatedness
relatedness to
to the
the Being
Being ofof beings. If we follow
beings. If follow
what the thinker
thinker Nietzsche
Nietzsche thinks,
thinks ? we operate
operate within this
this
relatedness to
relatedness to Being. We
Being. We are thinking. To say
are thinking. say it
it more
circumspectly,
circumspectly^ we are attempting to
are attempting to let
let ourselves
ourselves become
involved in this
involved in relatedness to
this relatedness to Being.
Being. We are We
are attempting
attempting to
to
learn
learn thinking.
thinking.
We are
are talking Nietzsche, but we are
talking about Nietzsche, are asking
asking: what
:
is it
is it that
that is
is called
called thinking,
thinking, what does does call
call for
for thinking?
thinking?
pursue only
But we pursue Nietzsche says
only what Nietzsche says about thethe super
super-
man. Even then we are are inquiring
inquiring about the the superman's
superman's
nature
nature only
only to
to the
the extent
extent to to which he is the man who passes
is the passes
over.
over. We areare intent
intent on thethe passage across. From this
passage across. this point
point
of view,
view, we ask ask what he goes away from,
goes away from, and where he
goes
goes who goes
goes across.
across. Thus we are are asking
asking about the bridge
bridge
for the passage
passage across.
across. But we are are by
by no means asking
asking about
the Being
Being of beings.
beings. What is more, our question
is more, question about the
bridge
bridge for the passage
passage across brought us up
across has brought up against
against a
peculiar
peculiar and singular
singular thing. What, for Nietzsche,
thing. What, Nietzsche, isis the
bridge
bridge toto the highest
highest hope--to essential form of man
hope to the essential
who goes is for him "the
goes beyond
beyond man so so far? That bridge
bridge is
deliverance from revenge!' According to
revenge." According to Nietzsche,
Nietzsche, the
spirit
spirit of revenge
revenge marks man as as he is
is so far, and most com
so far, com-
pletely
pletely the last
last man. However,
However, the overcoming
overcoming of venge-
venge-
fulness is patently
fulness is patently a separate
separate problem
problem which concems
concerns moral
conduct,
conduct, the morality
morality of of man's behavior and attitude.
attitude. The
discussion
discussion of of vengefulness
vengefulness and its its overcoming belongs to
overcoming belongs to
the field
field of ethics
ethics and morals. How then are we, we, who are
pursuing
pursuing this
this separate
separate question
question of of revenge
revenge and its its overcom-
overcom
ing,
ing, how are we supposed
supposed to be dealing Nietzsche's
dealing with Nietzsche's
thought
thought proper,
proper, that is, is, with
with the relatedness
relatedness to Being?
Being? The
PART
PAR.T II 87
question
question of revenge
revenge and its its overcoming
overcoming isis no doubt impor
impor-
tant,
tant, but still
still it
it is
is quite question of what
quite remote from the question
is.
is. The question
question of revenge
revenge is
is after all
all not the question
question of
Being.
Being. Let us see.
see. Let us learn thinking.
thinking.
LECTURE
LECTURE
IX
·-·
Nietzsche's thinking focuses on deliverance from the spirit
Nietzsche's thinking spirit
revenge. It
of revenge. It focuses
focuses on a spirit which, being
spirit which, being the freedom
from revenge,
revenge, isis prior
prior toto all
all mere fraternization,
fraternization, but also also to
to
any
any mere desire
desire to
to mete out punishment,
punishment, to to all
all peace
peace efforts
efforts
and all
all warmongering-prior
warmongering prior to to that
that other spirit
spirit which
would establish and secure peace, pax, by
peace, par, pacts. The space
by pacts. space
of this freedom from revenge revenge is is prior
prior to
to all pacifism, and
all pacifism,
equally
equally toto all
all power politics. It
power politics. is prior
It is prior to all weak do-
to all
nothingism
nothingism and shirking sacrifice, and to
shirking of sacrifice, to blind activity
activity
for its
its own sake. The space space of freedom from revenge revenge is is
where Nietzsche sees sees the superman's essential nature. That
superman's essential
is
is the space
space toward which he who crosses crosses over isis moving
moving-
the superman-"
superman "Caesar Caesar with the so soul Christ."
ul of Christ."
thinking focuses on the spirit spirit of freedom
from revenge--this
revenge this is is his
his alleged free-thinking. If
alleged free-thinking. If we will
just keep
just keep this basic trait thought in mind however
trait of his thought
vaguely,
vaguely, the prevailing
prevailing image which is
Nietzsche--which
image of Nietzsche is al
al-
ready
ready deeply
deeply rooted in the current views views-is is bound to to
crumble.
We are trying
We trying to to mark out the way way of him who crossescrosses
over,
over, that is,
is, the passage
passage and transition
transition from the last last man
to the superman.
superman. We We are asking bridge from the one
asking for the bridge
to the other. The bridge,
to bridge, in Nietzsche's own words, words, is is the
deliverance from revenge.
revenge.
88
PAET II
PAR.T 89
8
As has
As has already
already been
been suggested, one could take the the view
that
that the problem
problem of revenge,
revenge, and of of deliverance from rere
venge,
venge, is is peculiar
peculiar to to ethics
ethics and
and moral education-while
education while thethe
anatomy
anatomy of the the desire
desire for
for revenge,
revenge, as as a a basic
basic trait
trait ofof man
and thought
and thought so so far,
far, is
is a
a task
task for
for "psychology."
"psychology." Judged by by
their
their wording,
wording, and
and even by
by their
their headings, Nietzsche's
headings, Nietzsche's dis dis-
cussions do indeed move move in in the
the traditional
traditional conceptual
conceptual
framework of ethics ethics and psychology.
psychology. But in
in substance,
substance,
Nietzsche thinks of everything
everything that
that falls
falls under the
the heads ofof
"ethics"
"ethics" and "psychology"
"psychology" in in terms of of metaphysics,
metaphysics, that
is,
is, with a view to to the question
question how the Being Being of beings as
of beings as
a whole is is determined, and how it
determined, concerns man. "Ethics"
it concerns "Ethics"
and "psychology"
"psychology" are grounded grounded in metaphysics. When it
in metaphysics. it
comes to saving saving man's essential
essential nature, psychology-
nature psychology
7
whether as such or in the form of of psychotherapy

psychotherapy-is is help-
help
less;5 ethics as
less as a mere doctrine
doctrine and imperative is helpless
imperative is helpless
unless man first first comes to to have a a different
different fundamental
relation
relation to to Being-unless
Being unless man of his own accord,
of his accord, so so far
far as
as
in him lies,
lies, begins
begins at last
last to
to hold his
his nature openopen for
for once to
the essential relation toward Being Being, no matter whether
?
Being
Being specifically
specifically addresses itself to man,
itself to man, or or whether it it still
still
lets him be speechless
lets speechless because he is is painless.
painless. But even if if we
do no more than bear and endure this this speechlessness
speechlessness and
painlessness, our nature is
painlessness, is already
already openopen to to the claim of of
Being. Yet even this
Being. this openness
openness to to Being,
Being, which thinking
thinking can
prepare, is
prepare, is of itself
itself helpless
helpless to save man. A
to save A real
real openness
openness in in
his relatedness
his relatedness to to Being
Being isis a necessary
necessary though
though not sufficient
sufficient
saving him. And yet,
condition for saving thinking
precisely when thinking
yet, precisely
plies its
plies its proper
proper trade,
trade, which is is to
to rip
rip away
away thethe fog
fog that
that
conceals beings
conceals beings as as such,
such, itit must be concerned not to to cover
cover
up the rift.
up rift. Hegel
Hegel once expressed
expressed the the point
point as as follows,
follows,
though only
though only in a purely
purely metaphysical
metaphysical respectrespect and dimendimen-
sion: "Better a mended sock than aa torn
sion : tom oneone--notnot soso with
with
self-consciousness." Sound common
self-consciousness." common sense, sense, bent
bent onon utility,
utility,
sides with the "mended" sock.
sides sock. On thethe other
other hand,
hand, reflection
reflection
sphere in
on the sphere in which particular
particular beings
beings areare revealed
revealed-
90 WHAT CA3LLED THINKING?
which is is for modern philosophy sphere of
philosophy the sphere of subjectivity
subjectivity-
is
is on the side
side of the
the torn condition-the
condition torn consciousness.
the torn consciousness.
Through
Through the die rift,
rift, torn consciousness
consciousness is is open
open to to admit the
the
Absolute. This holds holds true
true for thinking: . . . The torn
for thinking: . . .
condition
condition keeps
keeps the way
way open
open into metaphysics.
into metaphysics.
And metaphysics
metaphysics in its its widest meaning
meaning-in fact the very-
in fact very
core
core ofof metaphysics-is
metaphysics is the sphere where we must from the
the sphere
start
start place
place Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's thinking revenge, and on deliver
thinking on revenge, deliver-
ance from revenge.
revenge. Our remarks here must necessarily necessarily
remain very very general,
general, and must keep keep constant
constant touch with
the words about the growinggrowing wasteland.
Still, any such remarks will
Still, any
take us step
will take step by
by step,
step, sentence
by
by sentence,
sentence, intointo a difficult
difficult landscape
landscape which is remote, how
is remote, how-
ever,
ever, from the the almost
almost airless spaces of
airless spaces of dead concepts
concepts and
luxuriant
luxuriant abstractions.
abstractions. This landscape
landscape isis in
in a land on whose
grounds
grounds all all movements of of our modern age age take
take place.
place. The
fact
fact that
that we do not see see or
or rather do not want to to see
see these
these
grounds,
grounds, much less less this
this land, is no proof
land, is proof that theythey are not
there.
In order to to understand that-and
that and how
how-Nietzsche
Nietzsche from
the very
very start thinks of revenge
revenge and the deliverance from re re-
venge
venge in metaphysical
metaphysical terms, that is,
terms, that is, in the light
light of Being
Being
which determines all all particular beings, we must note in
particular beings,
what form the nature of the Being Being of beings
beings makes its its
appearance
appearance in the modern era. era. The form of of the nature of of
Being
Being which we have in mind has found its its classic
classic formula-
formula
tion in a few sentences which Schelling Schelling wrote in in 1809, in
1809, in
Ms Philosophical
his Philosophical Investigation Concerning the
Investigation Concerning the Nature of of
Human Freedom and its its Object.
Object. The three
three sentences
sentences that
that
follow are expressly
expressly set
set off
off in Schelling's text by
Schelling's text by aa hyphen
hyphen
from what went before, before, further emphasizing
emphasizing theirtheir funda
funda-
mental importance.
importance. TheyThey run : :
"In the fmal

final and highest is no being
instance, there is
highest instance, being
other than willing.
willing. Willing is primal
Willing is primal being
being and toto it
it
alone [willing]
[willing] belong
belong all [primal being's]
all [primal being's] predicates
predicates: :
PAET
PART II 91
1
being unconditioned,
being unconditioned, eternity,
etemity, independence
independence of of time,
time,
self-affirmation. All
self-affirmation. All philosophy
philosophy strives
strives only
only to find this
to find
highest expression"
highest expression" (Works,
(Works, Section
Section I,
I, vol.
vol. 7,
7, p.
p. 550)
550)..
The predicates,
The predicates, then,then, which
which metaphysical
metaphysical thoughtthought has has
since antiquity
since antiquity attributed
attributed to Being, Schelling
to Being, Schelling finds
finds inin their
their
fmal, highest
final, highest and hence most most perfected
perfected formform in willing.
in willing.
will in
The will in this
this willing
willing does
does not
not mean
mean here
here aa capacity
capacity ofof
the human soul,
the soul, however^
however; the the word "willing" here
word "willing" here desig
desig-
nates the
nates the Being
Being of of beings
beings as as a whole.
whole. Every
Every single being
single being
and all
all beings
beings as as a whole have their their essential
essential powers
powers in in and
through the
through will. That sounds
the will. sounds strange
strange to us; and
to us^ and itit wiH
will
strange as
remain strange as long
long asas we remain strangers
strangers to to the essen
essen-
tial and simple
tial simple thoughts
thoughts of of occidental
occidental metaphysics,
metaphysics, in other
words, as
words, as long
long asas we do not not think
think those
those thoughts
thoughts but but merely
merely
go on forever
go forever reporting
reporting them. It It is
is possible,
possible, for
for example,
example, to
ascertain historically down to
ascertain historically the last
to the last detail
detail what Leibniz
said about the Being
said Being of of beings,
beings, and yet yet not to to understand in
the least
least what Leibniz thought thought when he defined the Being Being
of
of beings
beings from the perspective
perspective of monad, and defined
of the monad, defmed
the
the monad as as the unity
unity of perceptio and appetituSj
of perceptio appetitus, as as the
oneness
oneness of of perception appetite. What Leibniz thought
perception and appetite. thought
is
is then expressed
expressed by by Kant and Fichte as the rational will, will,
which Hegel
Hegel and Schelling,
Schelling, each in his his own way, way, reflect
upon.
upon. Schopenhauer
Schopenhauer names and intends the same thing thing
when he thinks
thinks of of the world as
as will
will and idea;
idea; and Nietzsche
thinks
thinks thethe same thing thing when he defines the primal primal nature
of
of beings
beings as as the will
will toto power.
power. That the Being Being of of beings
beings
appears
appears here
here invariably
invariably and always as will,
and always as will, is
is not because
aa few
few philosophers
philosophers have formed opinions opinions about Being. Being,
What thisthis appearance
appearance of of Being
Being as as will points
points to is some
is some-
thing
thing that
that cannot
cannot be foundfound out by by any
any amount of of scholar-
scholar
ship.
ship. Only
Only the the inquiry
inquiry of of thought
thought can approach
approach it, it, only
only
thought
thought can can dodo justice
justice toto its
its problematic,
problematic, only only thought
thought can
keep
keep it
it thoughtfully
thoughtfully in in mind
mind andand memory.
memory.
To
To modern
modern metaphysics,
metaphysics, the the Being
Being of of beings
beings appears
appears asas
will.
will. But inasmuch as as man, because of
man, because of his
his nature
nature as as the
the
thinking
tMnking animal and by by virtue
virtue of of forming
forming ideas,
ideas, is
is related
related
to
to beings
beings in their their Being,
Being, is is thereby related to
thereby related to Being,
Being, and is is
thus determined by by Being--therefore
Being therefore man's being, being, inin keep
keep-
ing
ing with this this relatedness
relatedness of of Being (which now means,
Being (which means, of of
the will)
will) to to human nature,nature, must emphatically
emphatically appearappear as as aa
willing.
willing.
How,
How, then,
then, does
does Nietzsche
Nietzsche think of of the
the nature
nature of of revenge
revenge
if
if he thinks
thinks of of it metaphysically? We may
it metaphysically? may explain
explain the the
question
question with this this other
other question:
question: what is is the
the nature
nature of of
revenge,
revenge, if if its
its pursuit
pursuit determines
determines all all ideas?
ideas? The idea idea sets
sets
before us that that which is. is. It
It determines and sets sets down what
may
may pass
pass as having being.
as having being. The determination
determination of of what is, is,
then,
then, isis in
in a a certain
certain way way at at the
the command of of aa way
way ofof form
form-
ing
ing ideas
ideas which pursuespursues and sets upon everything
sets upon everything in in order
order
to set
to set it up and maintain it
it up it in
in its
its own way.way.
Since longlong ago,
ago, that
that which is is present
present has been regardedregarded
as
as what is. representational ideas can we form of
is. But what representational ideas of
what in a way way is is no longer, and yet still
longer, is? What ideas
yet still is? ideas can
we form of that which was? At this this "it
"it was,"
was," idea
idea and its its
willing
willing take offense.
offense. Faced with what "was," willing no
"was," willing
longer
longer has anything
anything to to say.
say. Faced with every every "it was," will
"it was," will-
ing
ing no longer
longer has anything
anything to propose. This "it
to propose. "it was" resists
resists
the willing
willing of of that will.
will. The "it "it was" becomes a a stumbling
stumbling
block for all
block all willing. It
willing. It is is the block
block which the will can no
the will
longer
longer budge.
budge. Then the "it "it was" becomes the the sorrow and
despair
despair of of all
all willing
willing which,
which, being being what it it is,
is, always
always willswills
forward,
forward, and is is always
always foiled
foiled by by the bygones
bygones thatthat lie
lie fixed
fixed
finnly
firmly in the past. past. Thus the "it "it was" is is revolting
revolting and con con-
trary
trary toto the will.
will. This is is why
why revulsion against against the
the "it
"it was"
arises in the will will itself
itself when it it is
is faced
faced with this this contrary
contrary
"it was." But by by way
way of this revulsion, the
this revulsion, the contrary
contrary takes
takes
root within willingwilling itself.
itself. Willing endures the
Willing the contrary
contrary
within itself
itself asas a heavy
heavy burden;
burden; it it suffers
suffers from it it-that is,
that is,
the will
will suffers
suffers from itself. itself. Willing appears to
Willing appears to itself
itself asas this
this
PART 1I
PART 93
5
suffering
suffering from the "it "it was,"
was/* as the suffering
as the suffering from the the byby-
gone,
gone, the past.
past. But what is is past stems
past stems from the the passing,
passing. The
will-in
win in suffering
suffering from this passing, yet
this passing, yet being
being what it it is
is
precisely
precisely byby virtue
virtue of of this
this suffering--remains
suffering remains inin its
its willing
willing
captive
captive toto the passing.
passing. Thus will itself wills
will itself wills passing.
passing. It It wills
wills
the
the passing
passing of its its suffering,
suffering, and thus thus wills
wills its
its own
OV\'11 passing.
passing.
The will's
will's revulsion
revulsion against every
against every
*4
"it
it was" appears
appears as as the
the
will
will to
to pass
pass away,
away which wills
7
wiUs thatthat everything
everything be worthy
worthy of of
passing
passing away.
away. The revulsion
revulsion arising
arising in in the
the will
will is
is then thethe
will
will against
against everything
everything that passes-everything,
that passes everything, that that is,
is,
which comes to to- be out
out ofof a coming-to-be, and endures.
a coming-to-be, endures.
Hence the willwill isis the sphere
sphere of representational ideas
of representational ideas which
basically
basically pursue
pursue and set set upon
upon everything
everything thatthat comes and
goes
goes and exists,
exists, in in order toto depose, reduce it
depose, reduce it in
in its
its stature
stature
and ultimately
ultimately decompose
decompose it. it. This revulsion
revulsion within the will will
itself,
itself, according
according to to Nietzsche,
Nietzsche, is the essential
is the essential nature of of
revenge.
revenge.
"This,
"This, yes,
yes, this
this alone is
is revenge itself: the will's
revenge itself: will's re
re-
vulsion
vulsion against
against time and itsits *It
'It was
was'." (Thus Spoke
." (Thus
7
Spoke
Zarathustra, Part II,
Zarathustra, II, "On Deliverance.")
Deliverance.")
Revenge, however, never calls

Revenge, however, itself by
calls itself its own name,
by its name,
least
least of
of all
all when it
it is
is in
in the act of taking
act of taking revenge.
revenge. Revenge
Revenge
calls
calls itself
itself "punishment."
'punishment." By this name it
By this it endows its
its hostile
hostile
*
nature
nature with the the semblance of right
right and justice.
justice. It
It covers
covers
its
its revolting
revolting nature with the semblance that that it
it is meting
is meting
out
out well-deserved
well-deserved punishment.
punishment.
"" 'Punishment'-that
'Punishment' that is revenge calls
is what revenge itself:
calls itself:
with aa lying
lying word it
it counterfeits
counterfeits aa good
good conscience"
conscience"
(ibid.).
(ibid.} .
This is not the place

is not place to
to discuss these words of
discuss whether these of
Nietzsche, on revenge
Nietzsche, revenge and punishment, revenge and suffer-
punishment, revenge suffer
ing,
ing, revenge
revenge and deliverance from revenge,
revenge, represent
represent a
direct
direct confrontation
confrontation with Schopenhauer, indirectly one
Schopenhauer, and indirectly
94
IS CALLED
WHAT IS THINKING?
with
with allall world-denying attitudes.
world-denying attitudes. We We must turn our our atten-
atten
tion
tion elsewhere
elsewhere to to see
see the
die full
full implications
implications of of his
Ms thoughts
thoughts
about
about revenge,
revenge, and
and to
to understand
understand where Nietzsche
Nietzsche is
is really
really
looking
looking for deliverance
for deliverance fromfrom revenge.
revenge. Then we shall shall bebe
able
able toto see
see within
within what
what limits
limits Nietzsche's
thinking aboutabout
revenge
revenge is is moving. In
moving. In that that way,
way, the
the realm of his thinking
of his thinking
as
as aa whole
whole will
will emerge
emerge more distinctly.
distinctly. Then it
it is
is bound to
to
become
become clear in what what wayway Nietzsche,
Nietzsche, while speaking
speaking of of
revenge,
revenge, thinks about the Being Being ofof beings
beings asas aa whole.
whole. It It is
is
bound to to become clear
clear that
that Nietzsche
Nietzsche does
does in
in fact
fact think
think of of
nothing
nothing elseelse than the Being of
Being of beings
beings when he thinks thinks of of
the spirit
spirit of revenge
revenge and of of deliverance
deliverance from revenge.
revenge. And
if
if all
all this
this is
is so,
so, then Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's question
question about revenge,
about revenge,
rightly
rightly thought
thought through,
through, will
will lead
lead us to the fundamental
to the fundamental
position
position of his his thought,
thought, that
that is, into the heart and core
is, into the heart core ofof
his metaphysics.
metaphysics. Once we reach that that heartland,
heartland, we are are in
in
the realm from which the words were spoken spoken: "The waste
: waste-
land grows
grows . . .."
. . "Now,
Now, ifif the spirit
spirit of
of revenge
revenge determines
determines
all
all thinking so far, and this
thinking far, this thinking
thinking is is essentially
essentially aa form
form-
ing
ing ofof ideas,
ideas, then a longlong perspective
perspective isis bound toto open
open up up on
the nature and essence of representational
representational ideas.
ideas. We shall shall
have an openopen view of the area in which thinking
area in thinking so so far
far is
is
moving-even
moving Nietzsche's own thinking.
even Nietzsche's thinking.
In order to see how far
to see far Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's thought
thought about
about re re-
venge carries
venge carries metaphysically,
metaphysically, or rather how far
or rather far itit is
is car
car-
ried, we must note how he sees
ried, sees and
and defines
defines the
the nature
nature of of
revenge. Nietzsche says
revenge. says::
"This, yes,
"This, yes, this
this alone
alone is revenge itself:
is revenge itself: the
the will's
will's re
re-
vulsion against
vulsion against time and its
its 'It
'It was'."
was'."
description of
That a description of revenge
revenge should
should stress
stress what
what is
is re
re-
volting and refractory
volting refractory in
in revenge,
revenge, and
and thus
thus runs
runs counter
counter
to the
to the will,
will, seems
seems to
to be
be in
in the
the nature
nature of
of the
the case.
case. But
But Nietz
Nietz-
sche's thought
sche's thought goes further. He
goes further. He does
does not
not say simply: ReRe-
say simply :
venge is
venge is revulsion
revulsion-just as we
just as we might describe hatred as
might describe hatred as
PABT I
PART 95
5
refractory
refractory and detracting.
detracting. Nietzsche
Nietzsche says: says: Revenge is is die
the
will's
will's revulsion. \Ve We have since noted that "will,"
since noted ""'-ill," in in the
the
language
language of modem metaphysics,
of modern metaphysics, does does notnot mean only hu hu-
man willing,
willing, but thatthat "will" "willing" are
"will" and "willing" are thethe name
of the Being
Being of beings
beings as as a whole. Nietzsche's description
whole. Nietzsche's
of revenge
revenge as as "the will's
will's revulsion"
revulsion" brings brings revenge into into
relatedness with the Being
relatedness Being of beings. That this
of beings. this is
is so
so becomes
fully
fully clear
clear when we note what it it is
is that
that the
the mil's
will's revulsion
revulsion
turns against.
against. Revenge
Revenge is--the
is revulsion against time
will's revulsion
the will's
its "It
and its "It was."
At first
first and second reading, and even
reading, even still at at aa third
third
reading,
reading, thisthis defmition
definition of the essential
essential nature
nature of revenge
of revenge
will
will strike
strike us as as surprising, incomprehensible, and ulti
surprising, incomprehensible, ulti-
mately arbitrary. In fact,
mately arbitrary. fact, it must It
it must. It must do so so asas long
long asas
we overlook,
overlook, first,
first, the
the direction
direction which the the word "will"
"will" indi indi-
cates
cates here,
here, and then,
then, what the tenn "time" here
the term here means. But
Nietzsche himself gives gives an answer to the question
to the question how he
essential nature. He says
conceives time's essential says: Revenge
: Revenge is is "the
"
will's
will's revulsion against
against time and its its *It was.' " We must
'It was.'
think through
through this this statement of of Nietzsche
Nietzsche with as as much
care asas ifif we were dealing with one of
dealing Aristotle. And as
of Aristotle. as
concerns the definition
definition of the essential
of the essential nature of time, we
of time,
are indeed faced with a statement of of Aristotle.
Aristotle. Of course, course,
Nietzsche did not have Aristotle Aristotle in in mind when he wrote
down his his statement. Nor do we mean to suggest that
to suggest that Nietz
Nietz-
sche isis beholden to to Aristotle.
Aristotle. A thinker is is not beholden to to a
thinker-rather,
thinker rather, when he is is thinking,
thinking, he holds holds on to to what
is
is to
to be thought,
thought, to to Being.
Being. Only insofar as
Only insofar as he holds
holds on to to
Being can he be open
Being open to to the :influx
influx of of the thoughts
thoughts which
thinkers before him have thought. thought. This is is why
why it it remains
the exclusive privilege of the greatest
exclusive privilege greatest thinkers
thinkers to to let
let them
them-
selves
selves be influenced.
influenced. The small thinkers,thinkers, by by contrast,
contrast, merely
merely
suffer
suffer from constipated
constipated originality,
originality, and hence close close themthem-
selves
selves offoff against
against anyany influx
influx coming
coming from afar. afar. Nietzsche
says: Revenge
says: Revenge is is "the will's
will's revulsion against against time . ..."
. ."
He does not say: say: against

against something temporal; he does
something temporal j
does not not
say:
say against
:
against a specific
specific characteristic
characteristic of of time$
time; he sayssays flatly:
flatly :
revulsion against time. Of course,

against time. course, thethe words "and its 'It
its *It
"
was' "follow follow directly.
directly. That means,means, doesdoes it it not
not: against
against the
: the
ic
"it it was" in in time.
time. We We shall here be
shall here be reminded that that timetime
includes not only only the "it "it was,"
was," but alsoalso thethe "it
"it will
will be" and
the "it
"it isis now." Certainly.
Certainly. Time includesincludes not only only the
the past
past
but also
also thethe future and the present. Nietzsche,
the present. Nietzsche, then, then, by by
stressing
stressing the "it "it was,"
was/' does intend time in
does intend in aa particular
particular
respect,
respect, and not not "time" as as such,
such, inin general.
general. But what about about
"time"? After all all it
it is
is not
not a bundle in in which past past, future,
future,
?
and present
present are are wrapped
wrapped up up together.
together. Time is is not cage in
not aa cage in
which the "no longer longer now,"
now," the the "not yet yet now/'
now," and the the
"now" are are cooped
cooped up up together.
together. How do matters stand stand with
"time"? They They stand thus : time goes.
: goes. And it goes in
it goes that it
in that it
passes
passes away.away. The passingpassing of of time is,is, of
of course,
course, a coming
coming,7
but a a coming
coming which goes, goes, inin passing away. What comes in
passing away. in
time never comes to to stay,
stay, but to go. What comes in
to go. in time
always
always bearsbears beforehand the mark of of going
going pastpast and passing
passing
away.
away. This is is why
why everything temporal is
everything temporal is regarded
regarded simply
simply
as
as what is is transitory.
transitory. This is why the
is why the "It"It was" does does not
mention just just one out of time's three sectors.
time's three sectors. Rather: the the
true endowment which time gives leaves behind is
gives and leaves is what
has passed away, the "It
passed away, "It was." Time gives gives onlyonly what it it has,
has,
and it it has only what it
only it is
is itself.
itself.
Therefore,
Therefore, when Nietzsche says says that
that revenge
revenge is is thethe
will's
will's revulsion against against time and its its "It
"It was,"
was," he does does not not
just single
just single out some particular
particular determinant of of time,
time, but he
describes and defines time in respect respect of of what distinguishes
distinguishes
it
it in itsits total
total time character.
character. And that that is is its
its passing
passing away.
away.
The word "and" in Nietzsche's phrase "time and its
Nietzsche's phrase its 'It
'It
"
was' "is is not just
just a conjunction
conjunction to to add some particular;
particular; this this
"and" here signifies signifies as as much as as "and that that means." Re Re-
venge
venge is is the will's
will's revulsion against time, and that
against time, that means,
means,
against
against the passing
passing away
away and its past.
its past.
PAET
PART II 97
97
TMs
This characterization
characterization of
of time
time as
as aa passing
passing away,
away, aa flow
flow-
ing away
ing away in
in succession,
succession, the
the emergence
emergence and
and fading
fading of
of every
that rolls
"now" that rolls past,
past, out
out of
of the
the "not
"not yet
yet now" into
into the
the
"no longer
longer now";
now"; the
the characterization,
characterization, accordingly,
accordingly, of
of the
the
temporal as
temporal as the
the transitory
transitory-all this together
all this together is
is what
what marks
marks
the idea
the idea of
of "time" that
that is
is current
current throughout
throughout the meta
meta-
physics of
physics of the
the West.

Summary Transition
"For that
that man be be delivered from revenge:
delivered from revenge: thatthat is for me
is for
the bridge
the bridge toto the highest hope. . . ."
highest hope. . ." .
Whether this this highest

highest hope
hope of of which Nietzsche is is think
think-
ing
ing still
still leaves
leaves room for hope, or
for hope, or whether it it does
does not
not on the
contrary carry
contrary within itself
carry within itself the real
real devastation,
devastation, is is some
some-
thing
thing we cannot make out as as long
long asas we fail
fail to
to risk
risk crossing
crossing
over the
over bridge with Nietzsche.
the hridge Nietzsche. The crossing crossing over the the
bridge,
bridge, however,
however, is is not just
just one step
step in in Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's thought
thought
among
among many many others.
others. This crossing
crossing of of the bridge
bridge is is the one
real step, and here that means always
real step, always the sole sole step,
step, of the
entire
entire thinking
thinking in in which Nietzsche's metaphysics
metaphysics is is devel-
devel
oped.
oped. The purpose
purpose of the present
present lecture is is to help
help us joinjoin
Nietzsche in
Nietzsche in this
this one step
step of his thought.
thought. The bridgebridge is is the
deliverance
deliverance from revenge.revenge. The bridge bridge leads away away from
revenge.
revenge. We ask: ask: where? It It leads
leads where there is is no more
room forfor revenge.

revenge. That cannot be just just any
any place--nor
place nor isis it.
it.
The passage
passage across
across the bridge
bridge leads
leads us to to the peak
peak of Nietz-
Nietz
sche's
sche's metaphysics.
metaphysics.
Deliverance
Deliverance from revenge remains from the outset
from revenge outset partly
partly
determined by by what revenge
revenge itself
itself is.
is. For Nietzsche,
Nietzsche, rere
venge
venge is is the
the fundamental
fundamental characteristic
characteristic of all all thought
thought so
far.
far. That is to say: in which
is to say: revenge
revenge marks the manner in
man so so far
far relates
relates himself to to what is. is. Nietzsche thinks of of
the
the nature
nature of of revenge
revenge inin the light
light of of this
this relation.
relation. Merely
Merely
by
by relating
relating himself
himself to
to what
what is,
is, man places
places and faces
faces beings
beings
98
8 WHAT
IS CALLED THINKING?
in their
in their Being.
Being. Seen
Seen in
in the
the light
light of
of what
what is,
is, the
the facing,
facing, the
the
idea of
idea of beings
beings always
always goes
goes beyond
beyond beings.
beings. For
For instance,
instance,
when we are
when are facing
facing the cathedral, we
the cathedral, we are
are faced
faced not
not just
just with
with
a church,
church, aa building,
building, but
but with
with something
something that
that is
is present,
present, in
in
its presence.
its presence. ButBut the
the presence
presence of
of what
what is
is present
present isis not
not
fmally and also
finally
also something we
something we face,
face, rather
rather it
it comes
comes before.
before.
Prior to all else
Prior to all else itit stands
stands before
before us,
us, only
only we
we do do notnot see
see it it
because we stand
because stand within
within it. It is
it. It is what
what really
really comes
comes before
before
us. The facing,
us. facing, thethe idea
idea of of what is, judged from
is, judged from whatwhat is, is, is
is
always beyond
always beyond what is perd. To have
is-fLETcL. have seen
seen this
this /tera, that
fLETcf, that
is, to have thought it, is
is, to have thought it,
is the
the simple
simple and and thus
thus inexhaustible
inexhaustible
meaning of
meaning of all thought. The idea
all Greek thought. idea ofof what is, is, is
is in
in
itself metaphysical. When Nietzsche
itself metaphysical. Nietzsche thinks thinks of of revenge
revenge as as
the fundamental characteristic
the characteristic of of the
the wayway ideas
ideas have been
formed so so far,
far, hehe thinks
thinks of of revenge
revenge metaphysically
metaphysically-that that
is, not only psychologically, not
is, not only psychologically,
not only
only morally.
morally.
In modern metaphysics,
In metaphysics, the Being Being of beingsbeings appears
appears as as
the will.
will. "Willing
"Willing is primal being,"
is primal being," says says Schelling.
Schelling. Among Among
the
the long
long established
established predicates
predicates of primal primal being
being are "eternity
"etemity
and independence
independence of of time." Accordingly,
Accordingly, only only that will will isis
primal
primal being
being which as as will
will is is independent
independent of time, time, and
etemal.
eternal. But that that does not just just mean the purely purely external
indication
indication thatthat the will
will occurs constantly
constantly and independently
independently
of time.
of time. Eternal will
will does
does not mean only
only a will that lasts
will lasts
eternally:
eternally it :it says
says that
that will
will isis primal
primal beingbeing only
only when it it is
is
eternal
eternal as as will.
will. And it it is
is that when,
when, as as will,
will, it
it eternally
eternally wills
the etemity
eternity of willing.
willing. The will will that is is eternal in this this sense
sense
no longer
longer follows
follows and depends
depends on the temporal temporal in what it it
wills,
wills, oror in
in its
its willing.
willing. It It is
is independent
independent of time. And so so it
it
can nono longer

longer be affronted
affronted by by time.
Revenge,
Revenge, says says Nietzsche,
Nietzsche, is is the will's
wilFs revulsion. What is is
refractory
refractory in in revenge,
revenge, whatwhat is is revolting in it,
revolting it, is
is not, how
not, how-
ever,
ever, accomplished
accomplished merely merely by by a willing;
willing} rather,
rather, it it is
is above
all
all related
related to to the
the will-in
will in metaphysical
metaphysical terms, terms, related
related to to
particular
particular beings
beings in in their
their Being.
Being. That That thisthis isis soso becomes
PAXT
PART I
I 99
clear
clear when we give give thought
thought to to what it is against which the
it is
revulsion of revenge
revenge revolts.
revolts. Nietzsche says says: Revenge
: Revenge is is the
will's
will's revulsion against
against time and its "It was." What does
its "It
"time" mean here? Our closer reflection in the preceding
closer reflection preceding
lecture had this
this result:
result when Nietzsche,
:
Nietzsche, in in Ms
his definition
definition of of
the essential nature of revenge,
revenge, mentions time, time, his
his idea of
"time" isis that by
by which the temporal
temporal is is made the temporal.
temporal.
And what is is temporal?
temporal? We We allall know it it without much cogi cogi-
tation. We are unmistakably
tation. We unmistakably reminded of what it is when
it is
we are told
told that someone's "time was up." up." The temporal
temporal is is
what must pass
pass away.
away. And time is is the passing
passing away
away ofof what
must pass
pass away.
away. Tills
This passing away is
passing away is conceived more pre pre-
cisely
cisely as the successive
successive flowing away of
flowing away of the "now" out of
the "not yet
yet now" intointo the "no longer now." Time
longer now/' Tiine causes
causes
the passing
passing away
away of what must pass pass away
away7 and does so by by
passing
passing away
away itself;
itself 7 yet
-
yet it
it itself
itself can passpass away
away only
only if if it
it
persists throughout all
persists throughout all the passing away. Time persists^
passing away. persists,
consists in passing.
consists passing. It is, in
It is in that it
?
it constantly
constantly is is not.
not. This
is
is the representational
representational idea of time that
that characterizes
characterizes the
the
concept
concept of "time" which is throughout the meta
is standard throughout meta-
physics
physics of the West.
LECTURE
LECTURE
X
.--·
VVhat is
What is the
the origin
origin of this long
of this long familiar
familiar idea of
of time as
as that
that
passes away,
which passes the temporal
away, the as what must pass
temporal as pass away?
away?
Did this
this definition
definition of
of time drop sky, like
drop out of the sky, like an
Absolute? Is
Is it
it obvious merely it has been current
merely because it
for
for so
so long?
long? And how did this idea of
this idea of time gain
gain currency?
currency?
How did it it get
get into the current of WesternW estem thought?
thought?
It
It is
is time,
time, itit is
is high
high time finally
finally to to think through
through this
this
nature of time,
time, and its its origin,
origin, so so that we may may reach the
point
point where it it becomes clear that aH metaphysics leaves
all metaphysics
something
something essential
essential unthought:
unthought its : its own ground
ground and foun-
foun
dation.
dation. This is is the ground on which we have to say that we
to say
ground
are not yetyet truly
truly thinking
thinking as long as
as long as we think only only meta
meta-
physically.
physically. When metaphysics inquires into
metaphysics inquires into the nature of
time,
time, itit will
will presumably,
presumably, will necessarily
necessarily have to, to, ask its
its
questions
questions in the way way that is is in keeping
keeping with its general
its general
manner of inquiry.
inquiry. Metaphysics
Metaphysics asks: asks Tt
: ri TO 5v
OP (Aristotle)
(Aristotle) :
:
what isis being?

being? Starting
Starting from being,
being, it it asks for the Being
Being of
beings.
beings. What in beings beings is
is in being?
being? In what does the Being Being
of beings
beings consist?
consist? With reference to to time, this is
time, this to say
is to say::
what of time is is truly being? In accordance with this
truly in being? this
manner of inquiry,
inquiry, time is is conceived as as something
something that in
way is,
some way is, something
something that is is in being,
being, and so so the question
question
of its Being
its Being is
is raised.
raised. Aristotle,
Aristotle, in his
his Physics,
Physics, IV, 10-14,
IV, 1014,
100
100
PART
PART II 101
101
has given
has given aa classic
classic development
development of of this
this manner
manner of
of inquiry.
inquiry.
the answer Aristotle
And the Aristotle gave
gave toto the question of of the
the
essential nature of
essential of time
time still
still governs
governs Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's idea of
of
time. All
time. All subsequent
subsequent conceptions
conceptions ofof time
time have
have their
their roots
in this
in this basic,
basic, Aristotelian
Aristotelian idea
idea of
of time,
time, which
which isis implicit
implicit in
in
thought. That does
Greek thought. does not
not exclude,
exclude, it
it includes
includes the fact
fact
that individual
that individual thinkers
thinkers such as
as Plotinus,
Plotinus, Augustine,
Augustine, Leib
Leib-
niz, Kant,
niz, Kant, Hegel,
Hegel, and Schelling
Schelling interpret
interpret the
the same situation
situation
in different
in different directions.
directions. What is
is the
the situation in regard
situation in regard to
to
time? What of
of time has being?
being? As soon as
as metaphysical
metaphysical
thought
thought poses this question,
poses this question, it already decided
it has already decided forfor itself
itself
what it understands by
it understands by "in being,"
being/* and in in what sense
sense it
it
thinks
thinks thethe word "being."
"being." "In "In being"
being" means
means: being
: being present.
present.
Beings
Beings are are more in being the
in being the more present
present they
they are. Beings
are. Beings
c"ome
come to to be more present,
present, the more abidingly
abidingly theythey abide,
abide, the
more lasting is. What in
lasting the abiding
abiding is. in time is is present,
present, and
therefore
therefore of of the
the present?
present? OnlyOnly thethe "now" is is of
of the present
present
time at given moment. The future is
at each given is the "not yetyet
now";
now"} the past past is longer now." The future is
25 the "no longer is what
is
is still
still absent,
absent, the pastpast what is is already
already absent.
absent. In being,
being,
present
present in time at given moment is
at the given only that narrow
is only
ridge
ridge of of the momentary
momentary fugitivefugitive "now," rising out of the
"now," rising
"not yetyet now" and fallingfalling away
away into the "no longer longer now."
Today's reckoning in sports,
Today's reckoning sports, for instance,
instance, with tenths of
seconds,
seconds, in modern physics physics even with millionths of seconds, seconds,
does not mean that we have a keener grasp
does grasp of time,
time, and
thus
thus gain
gain time;
time^ such reckoning
reckoning is is on the contrary
contrary the surest
surest
way
way to to lose
lose essential
essential time,
time, and so so to
to "have" always
always less
time. Thought
time. Thought out more preciselyprecisely : the growing
:
growing lossloss of time
is
is not
not caused
caused byby such
such aa time reckoning-rather,
reckoning rather, this this time
reckoning
reckoning began began atat that
that moment when when man suddenly
suddenly be-be
came
came un-restful
un-restful because he he had no more time. That mo- mo
ment is is the
the beginning
beginning of the the modern age. age.
What in in time is
is in
in being,
being, present? The "now" of the
present?
given "now" is is in its
given moment.
moment. But But eacheach "now" its present
present being
being by
is CALLED
WHAT IS THINKING?
virtue of its its passing.

passing. Future and past past areare not present,
present, they
they
are something
something of which we may may never say say simply
simply that
that they
they
are being
being present.
present. According
According to to Aristotle,
Aristotle, therefore,
therefore, the the
future and the the past
past are
are a ov n
a fw} ov n, and by by no means an ow ovK
ov,
7
OF, something
something that that is
is entirely without being,
entirely without being, they
they are
are some
some-
thing
thing that
that lacks
lacks presence.
presence. Augustine
Augustine says says exactly
exactly thethe same
thing,
thing, forfor example,
example, in in a commentary
commentary on the Thirty-Eighth
Thirty-Eighth
Psalm: Nihil de praeierito praeterito revocatur,
reuocatur^ quod quod futurum
futurum est^ est,
expectatur (Nothing
transiturum expectatur (Nothing of of what has has passed
passed willwill
be called
called back,
back, what is is of
of the future
future is is expected
expected as as some
some-
thing
thing that
that will
will pass by) . And later
pass by) . later in in the
the same passage,
passage, he
almost follows
follows Aristotle
Aristotle verbatim when he says: says : etet est
est et
non est (Migne,
(Migne, IV, IV, 419a).
419a). The essentialessential nature
nature of of time
time
is here conceived in
is in the
the light of Being
Being and, and, let
let us
us note
note itit
light of
well,
well, of a totally
totally specific
specific interpretation
interpretation of of "Being"
"Being"-Being Being
as being
being present.
present. This interpretation
interpretation of of Being
Being has has been
current so so long
long that
that we regard
regard it it as
as self-evident.
self-evident.
Since in all all metaphysics
metaphysics from the beginning beginning of of Western
thought,
thought, BeingBeing means being being present,
present, Being,Being, ifif it
it is
is to
to be
thought
thought in the highest highest instance,
instance, must be thought thought as as pure
pure
presence,
presence, that is, is, as
as the presence
presence thatthat persists,
persists, the
the abiding
abiding
present,
present, the steadily
steadily standing
standing "now." Medieval thought thought
speaks
speaks of nunc stans. stans. But that is is the interpretation
interpretation of of the
the
nature of eternity.
eternity.
Here let us recall
let us recall for a moment the explanationexplanation Schelling
Schelling
adds to to the statement "willing "willing is is primal being." He says
primal being." says
that among
among the predicates
predicates of primal
primal beingbeing there
there are
are "eter
"eter-
nity,
nity, independence
independence of of time."
If
If all metaphysics thinks of Bring
all metaphysics Being as as eternity
eternity and inde inde-
pendence
pendence of time, time, it it means precisely
precisely thisthis: the
: the idea
idea of beings
beings
sees them as
sees as in
in their
their Being
Being independent
independent of of time,
time, the
the idea
idea ofof
time sees
sees time in the sense of a passing passing away.away. What must
pass
pass away
away cannot be the ground ground of of thethe eternal.
eternal. To be
properly
properly beings
beings in their Being Being means to to be independent
independent of of
time in the sense of a passing away. But what about that
passing away. that
PART II
PART t03
definition,
definition, here left left unattended,
unattended, of of Being itself as as being
present,
present., even as the enduring presence? What about Being
enduring presence?
as the being-present,
being-present, in in whose light
light time was conceived as as
a passing
passing away,
away, and even eternity
eternity as as the
the present "now"? Is Is
not this
this definition of BeingBeing ruled
ruled by by the
the view ofof presence^
presence,
the present-ruled,
present ruled, that is, is, by the view of
by the of time
time,? and of of aa
time of such a nature as as we could never surmise,
surmise, letlet alone
alone
think,
think, with the help help ofof the traditional time concept?
traditional time concept? What
about Being
Being and Time,
Time, then? Must not not one as
as much as as the
the
other,
other, Being
Being as much as as Time-must
Time must not both become ques ques-
tionable in their
their relatedness, first questionable
relatedness,, first questionable and finally
fmally
doubtful? And does not this this show, then, that
show, then, that something
something was
left
left unthought
unthought at at the very
very core
core of of the
the definition
defmition which is is
regarded
regarded as guiding
guiding all all Western metaphysics
metaphysics--something
something
essential
essential in the essential
essential nature of of Being?
Being? The question
question
"Being
"Being and Time" points points toto what is unthought in
is unthought all meta
in all meta-
physics.
physics. Metaphysics
Metaphysics consists
consists ofof this
this unthought
unthought matter^
matter;
what is is unthought in metaphysics is
unthought metaphysics is therefore
therefore not
not aa defect
defect
of metaphysics.
metaphysics. Still
Still less may we declare
less may declare metaphysics
metaphysics to to be
false,
false., or even reject
reject itit as
as a wrong turn, aa mistake,
wrong turn, mistake, on the the
grounds
grounds that it it rests
rests upon
upon this
this unthought matter.
unthought matter.
Revenge,
Revenge, for Nietzsche,
Nietzsche, is will's revulsion
is the will's revulsion against
against
time. This now means: revenge revenge is is the will's
will's revulsion
revulsion
against
against thethe passing
passing away
away and what has passed passed away,
away, against
against
time and its its "It was." The revulsion turns turns not against
against thethe
mere passing,
passing, but against
against that passing
passing away
away which allowsallows
what has passed
passed toto be only
only in the past,
past, which lets
lets itit freeze
freeze
in the finality this rigor
finality of this rigor mortis. The revulsion
revulsion of revenge
revenge
is
is against that time which makes everything dissolve
against everything dissolve in in the
"It was,"
was," and thus makes passing away. The revulsion
pass away.
passing pass revulsion
of revenge
revenge is is not against
against the mere passing passing of
of time,
time, but
against
against the time that that makes the passingpassing pass
pass away
away in in the
past,
past, against
against the "It was." The revulsion revulsion ofof revenge
revenge re re-
mains chained to this this "It was"; just as
was"; just as there
there lies
lies concealed
in all
all hatred the abysmal
abysmal dependence
dependence upon upon that
that from which
104 WHAT
WHAT CALL ED THINKING?
IS CALLED T H I N KI N G?
at bottom always
hatred at always desires
desires to
to make itself
itself independent
independent
-but can, and can
but never can, can all
all the
the less
less the
the more it
it hates.
hates.
What, then,
What, then, is is the
the deliverance
deliverance from revenge,revenge, if if revenge
revenge
chains man to
chains to the
the arrested
arrested past?
past? Deliverance
Deliverance is is the detach
detach-
ment from what is is revolting
revolting to to the
the revulsion
revulsion of of revenge.
revenge.
Deliverance from revenge
Deliverance revenge is not liberation
is not liberation from all all will.
will.
For, since
For, since will
will isis Being, deliverance
Being, deliverance as as the
the annulment of of
willing would lead
willing lead to to nothingness. Deliverance from re
nothingness. Deliverance re-
venge is
venge is the will's liberation
the wilFs liberation from what is is revolting
revolting to to it,
it, so
so
that the
that the will
will can at at last
last be will.
will.
At what pointpoint is this "It
is this "It was" removed which is is always
always
revolting to
revolting to the
the will?
will? Not when there there is is no longer
longer any
any pass pass-
ing
ing away
away at at all.
all. For us men, time cannot be removed. But
us men,
what is is revolting
revolting to to the
the will
will fades awayaway when the past past does
does
not freeze
not in the
freeze in. the mere "It was," to
"It was," to confront
confront willing
willing in in fixed
fixed
rigidity.
rigidity. What is revolting vanishes when the
is revolting the passing
passing is is
not just
just a letting-pass
letting-pass in in which the past past sinks
sinks away
away into into the
mere "It "It was."
was," The will will becomes free free from what revolts revolts it it
when it it becomes free free asas will, that is,
will, that is, free
free for
for the going
going in
the passing
passing away-but
away but the kind of of going
going thatthat does not get get
away
away from the the will,
will, but comes back, back, bringing
bringing back what is is
gone. The will
gone. will becomes free free from itsits revulsion
revulsion against
against time,time,
against
against time's mere past, past, when it it steadily wills the going
steadily wills going
and coming,
coming, this this going
going and coming
coming back, back, of of everything.
everything.
The willwill becomes free free from what is revolting in the "It
is revolting
was" when it it wills

wills the constant recurrence
recurrence of every every "It
was." The will will is delivered from revulsion when it
is delivered it wills
wills the
constant recurrence of the same. Then the will wills the
eternity
eternity of what is is willed.
willed. The willwill wills
wills its
its own eternity.
eternity.
Will is is primal
primal being.
being. The highest product of primal
highest product primal beingbeing
is
is eternity.
eternity. The primal primal being
being of beings
beings is is the will,
will, as as the
eternally
eternally recurrent willing willing of the eternal
eternal recurrence of the
same. The eternaleternal recurrence of the same is
of the is the supreme
supreme
triumph
triumph of the metaphysics
metaphysics of the will will that
that eternally
eternally wills wills
its
its own willing. Deliverance from revenge is
willing. revenge is the transition,
transition,
PART II
PAR.T 105
from the will's

will's revulsion against time and its
against time "It was/*
its **It was," to to
the will
will that
that eternally
eternally wills
wills the recurrence
the same and
in this
this willing
willing wills
wills itself
itself as its own ground.
as its ground. Deliverance
Deliverance
from revenge
revenge is is the transition
transition to to the
the primal
primal "being
being of all
of all
beings.
beings.
At this
this point
point a remark must be inserted inserted which,
which, however
however,?
will
will have to to remain justjust a remark. As the will will ofof the
the eternal
eternal
recurrence of the same, same, the will will in
will can will reverse. For it
in reverse. it
will
will never encounter in in that direction any
that direction any fixed
fixed bygones
bygones
that it
it could no longer will.
longer will. The will will of
of the
the eternal
eternal recur
recur-
rence of the same frees frees willing
willing of of any
any possibility
possibility to to en
en-
counter anything
anything revolting.
revolting. For the the will
will ofof thethe eternal
eternal
recurrence of the same wills wills the reverse
reverse from the the start
start and
entire--it
entire it wills
wills return and recurrence. Christian dogma
recurrence. Christian dogma
knows of of another way way in in which the the "It
"It was" maymay be willedwilled
back-repentance.
back repentance. But repentance takes man where it
repentance takes it is
is
meant to to take
take him,
hirn to
?
to the deliverance
deliverance from the the "It"It was/*
was,"
only
only ifif it
it maintains its its essential relation to
essential relation to the forgiveness
forgiveness
of sin,
sin, and thus is is generally and from the outset
generally outset referred
to
to sin.
sin. Sin,
Sin, however,
however, is is essentially different from moral
essentially different
failure.
failure. Sin exists
exists only
only in the sphere
sphere of of faith.
faith. Sin is is the lack
of faith,
faith, the revolt
revolt against
against God as the Redeemer. If
as the re-
If re
pentance, joined to
pentance, joined to the forgiveness
forgiveness of of sin
sin and only
only that
that way
way,?
can will
will the return of the past, this will
past, this will of
of repentance,
repentance, seen
in
in the terms of thinking,
thinking, is is always
always determined metaphysimetaphysi-
cally,
cally, and is is possible
possible onlyonly that way way-possible
possible onlyonly by by its
its
relation
relation toto the eternal
eternal will
will of the redeeming God. If
the redeeming Nietz-
If Nietz
sche
sche does
does not taketake the Christian road of of repentance,
repentance, it it is
is
because of his his interpretation
interpretation of of Christianity
Christianity and what it it
means to to be a Christian.
Christian. This interpretation
interpretation in in turn is is
based on his his understanding
understanding of revenge revenge and what it it means
for
for all
all representation.
representation. And Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's interpretation
interpretation of
revenge is
revenge is based on the the fact
fact that he thinks
thinks ofof all
all things
things in
their
their relatedness
relatedness to to Being
Being as as will.
will.
Deliverance from revenge revenge is is the bridge
bridge crossed
crossed by by him
106 WHAT
IS CALLED THINKING?
who goes
goes across.
across. Where does go, he who goes
does he go, across? He
goes across?
goes where there
goes there is no more room for
is for revenge
revenge as as the revul
revul-
sion against
sion against what merely merely passes away. He who goes
passes away. goes across
across
goes toward the
goes will that
the will that wills
wills the
the eternal
eternal recurrence
same, toward the
same, the will
will which,
which, heing
being thisthis will,
will, isis the
the primal
primal
being of
"being all beings.
of all, beings.
The superman
superman surpasses
surpasses man as as he is is by
by entering
entering intointo
the relatedness
the relatedness to to Being--Being
Being Being which, which, as as the willwill of the
eternal recurrence of
the same, eternally wills
same, eternally wills itself
itself and
nothing else·.
nothing else. The superman
superman goes goes toward the eternal eternal recur
recur-
rence of
rence of the
the same, because that
same, because that isis where his his essential
essential nature
is rooted. Nietzsche
is rooted. Nietzsche casts
casts the superman's
superman's being being in the figure
figure
of Zarathustra. Who is
of Zarathustra. is Zarathustra? He is is the
the teacher
teacher of of
the eternal
the eternal recurrence
recurrence of of the same. The metaphysics
the same. metaphysics of of the
the
Being of
Being of beings,
beings, in in the
the sense
sense ofof the
the eternal
eternal recurrence of of
the
the same,
same, is is the
the ground
ground and foundation
foundation of of the
the book Thus
Spoke Zarathustra. Even in the
Spoke Zarathustra. the early
early drafts
drafts for for Part IV
and the conclusion of the work, dating from 1885,
work, dating Nietz-
1885, Nietz
sche says
says itit clearly
dearly (WW (WW XII, 397, 599,
XII, 597, 599, 401)
401) : "Zara-
: "Zara
thustra proclaims
proclaims the doctrine of recurrence." recurrence." "Zara "Zara-
thustra, out of
thustra, of the superman's happiness, tells
superman's happiness ,
tells thethe secret
secret
that
that everything
everything recurs."
recurs."
Zarathustra teachesteaches the doctrine of of the superman
superman be be-
cause
cause he is is the teacher
teacher of the eternal
eternal recurrence of the same.
Zarathustra teachesteaches both doctrines "at "at once" (XII, (XII, 401),
401),
because in theirtheir essence theythey belong
belong together.
together. Why Why do they they
belong together?
belong together? Not because they
they are these
these particular doc-
particular doc
trines,
trines, but because in in both doctrines
doctrines there is thought at
is thought at the
same time that which belongs together from the beginning
belongs together beginning
and thus inevitably
inevitably must be thought together-the
thought together Being
the Being
of beings
beings and its its relatedness
relatedness to the nature of
to the of man.
But this
this relatedness
relatedness of of Being
Being to nature, as
to man's nature, as the
relation of that nature to to Being,
Being, has not yet yet been givengiven
thought
thought in respect
respect of itsits essential
essential nature and origin. origin. Hence
we are still
still not able
able even to to give
give toto all
all this
this an adequate
adequate and
PART II
PAB.T 107
107
fitting
fitting name.
name. But
But because
because the
the relation
relation between Being and
human nature
human nature carries aH things,
carries all things, in
in that
that it
it brings Being's
brings
appearance
appearance as as well
well as as man's
man's essential nature nature to to fruition,
fruition,
therefore
therefore the the relation
relation mustmust fwd find expression
expression at
at the
the very
very be--
be
ginning
ginning of of Western
metaphysics. The relation relation is is mentioned
mentioned
in the principal
principal statements made by
in by Parmenides and Hera- Hera-
clitus.
ditus. What they they telltdl usus does
does notnot just
just stand
stand at the begin-
at the begin
ning,
ning, it it is
is the
the beginning
beginning of
of Western thought
thought itself-a
itself a
beginning
beginning that that we still conceiye in
still conceive in an allall too
too artless, all too
artless, all too
uninitiated fashion,
fashion, only only asas a
a part
part of
of history.
history.
Both Nietzsche's doctrine do-ctrine of of the
the eternal
eternal recurrence
recurrence of of
the same, and his
the same, his doctrine
doctrine of of the
the superman,
superman, must be be traced
traced
back in thought
thought to to the relation
relation between Being Being and human
nature,
nature, so that we can give give thought
thought to to both
both on theirtheir own
doubt-provoking
doubt-provoking common grounds. grounds. Only Only then
then cancan we fully
fully
fathom what it it means to to say that Nietzsche's interpretation
say that Nietzsche's interpretation
of the nature of revenge revenge is is metaphysical. The nature
metaphysical. nature of of
revenge
revenge as will,
will, and as as revulsion against the
against the passing
passing away,
away,
is
is conceived in
in the light
light of will
will asas primal
primal being
being--the will
the will
wills itself
which wills itself eternally
eternally as the eternal
as the eternal recurrence
the
same. This is is the thought
thought which carries carries and determines
determines the the
inner movement of of the
the work Thus Spoke Spoke Zarathustra.
Zarathustra. The
work moves in the style style ofof a steadily
steadily increasing
increasing hesitation
hesitation
and ritardando. That style style isis not
not aa literary
literary device;
device; it it is
is
nothing less
nothing less than thethe thinker's
thinker's relatedness
relatedness to to the
the Being
Being of of be
be--
ings, which must find
ings, find expression.
expression. Nietzsche
Nietzsche had had the
the thought
thought
eternal recurrence
of the eternal recurrence of of the
the same
same eveneven when he he wrote
wrote
his Joyful
his Joyful Knowledge,
Knowledge, publishedpublished in in 11882.
882. InIn the
the next-to-
next-to-
last section
last (541), "The Greatest
section (541) ,
Greatest Stress/'
Stress," thethe thought
thought is is
expressed for
expressed for the
the first
first time$
time; thethe last
last section,
section, "Incipit
"lncipit trag-trag-
already includes
oedia," already
oedia" includes the the beginning
beginning of of the
the first
first part
part ofof
Thus Spoke
Spoke Zarathustra
Zarathustra which which was was toto appear
appear the
the following
following
year. Yet,
year. Yet, inin this
this book,
book, that
that sustaining
sustaining thought
thought is is not
not ex
ex-
pressed until
pressed until PartPart HI III-not that Nietzsche
not that Nietzsche had had not not yet
yet
thought of
thought it when
of it when he he wrote
wrote Parts
Parts II and
and II.
II. The
The thought
thought of of
the eternal
eternal recurrence of of the same is is mentioned immedi immedi-
ately
ately atat the beginning
beginning of Part III, III, in in the
the second sectionsection
wMdi for
which for good
good reasons
reasons is
is entitled
entitled "On
44
On the
the Vision
Vision and the the
Riddle."
Riddle.' However,
7
However, the preceding

preceding Part II II had concluded
concluded
with the section
section "The Stillest Hour," where it
Stillest Hour/' it says
says: "Then
:
it
it spoke
spoke to to me again
again without voicevoice: 'What
: What do you
*
you matter,
matter,
"
Zarathustra? Speak Speak your
your word and break!' break!'" The thought thought
of
of the
the eternal
eternal recurrence
recurrence ofof the same is is Nietzsche's
Nietzsche's weight weight-
iest
iest thought
thought in in a twofold sense;
sense 5 it it is
is the
the most strenuous
strenuous to to
think,
tiiink, and it it has the
the greatest weight. It
greatest weight. It isis the heaviest
thought
thought to to bear.
bear. And while we must guard guard in in every
every respect
respect
against
against taking
taking this
this weightiest thought of
weightiest thought of Nietzsche
Nietzsche too too
lightly,
lightly, we stillstill will
will ask:
ask: does the the thought
thought of of the
the eternal
eternal
recurrence of of the same,
same, does the the recurrence
recurrence itself itself bring
bring
with it
it deliverance
deliverance from revenge?
revenge?
There is is a note which,
which, to judge by
to judge by thethe handwriting,
handwriting,
dates
dates from 1885 or or at
at the
the latest
latest 1886,
1886, with the the (under
(under-
scored)
scored) title
title "Recapitulation."
"Recapitulation." It It isis aa resume and gatheringgathering
together
together of Nietzsche's metaphysics
metaphysics and is is included in in The
Will to
to Power as as #617. It It says: everything recurs
says: "That everything recurs
is
is the extremest approximation
approximation of of a world of of Becoming
Becoming to to
the world of of Being: the high point of
high point of meditation."
meditation."
But that highhigh point
point does not rise
rise with clear,clear, firm outlines
into the brightness
brightness of of translucent ether.ether. The peak peak remains
wrapped
wrapped in thick clouds-not
clouds just for
not just for us,
us, but for for Nietz
Nietz-
sche's own thinking.
sche's thinking. The reasons do not lie lie inin any
any inability
inability
of Nietzsche,
Nietzsche, although
although his various attempts
attempts to to demonstrate
that the eternal recurrence of the same was the the Being
Being of of all
all
becoming
becoming led him curiously astray. It
curiously astray. is the
It is the matter itselfitself
which is is named by the term "the eternal
by eternal recurrence
the
same" that is is wrapped
wrapped in a darkness
darkness from which even
Nietzsche had to shrink back in terror. terror. In the- the· earliest
earliest pre
pre-
liminary
liminary sketches for Part IV of of Thus Spoke Spoke Zarathustra
Zarathustra
there isis found a notation which truly contains
truly contains the the motto
for the kind of writings
writings that Nietzsche himself himself published
published
after Zarathustra.
FART II
PART 109
u
There it it says:
says: "We We did create
create the the heaviest
heaviest thought-
now let let us create the being being to to whom it it will be light
will be light and
blissful! ....
blissful! . . To celebrate
celebrate the future, future, not not the
the past.
past. To
write the mythosmythos of the future! future! To live live inin hope!
hope! Blissful
moments! And then to to draw the the curtain
curtain shut shut again,
again, and
turn our thoughts
tum thoughts to to firm and present present purposes!"
purposes!" (XII, (XII,
400).
400) .
The thought
thought of the eternal recurrence of
the same re re-
mains veiled-and
veiled and not just just by by a curtain.
curtain. However,
However, the the
darkness of this this last
last thought
thought of metaphysics must
of Western metaphysics
not mislead us, us, must not promptprompt us us toto avoid
avoid it
it by
by subter
subter-
fuge.
fuge. Fundamentally
Fundamentally there are are onlyonly two subterfuges.
subterfuges.
Either we say say that thisthis Nietzschean thought thought of of the
the eternal
eternal
recurrence of the same is is a kind of of mysticism
mysticism and does does not
not
belong
belong in the court of thought. thought. Or else else we say say: this
: this thought
thought
is
is already
already as as old
old asas the hills,
hills, and amounts to to the
the cyclical
cyclical
world view,
view, which can be found in in Heraclitus'
Heraclitus' fragments
fragments
and elsewhere. This second bit bit ofof information,
information, like like every-
every
thing
thing of its
its kind, says absolutely
kind, says absolutely nothing. nothing. What good
good is is it
it
supposed
supposed to do us to to ascertain that some thought thought can
"already"
"already" be found in in Leibniz,
Leibniz, or or even "already"
"already" in in Plato
Plato
-if if Leibniz' thought
thought and Plato's thought are left
Plato's thought left inin the
same darkness as as this
this thought
thought that that is is allegedly
allegedly clarified
clarified by by
such references!
But asas concerns the first first subterfuge, according
subterfuge, according to to which
Nietzsche's thought
Nietzsche's thought of the eternal recurrence of of the same
is
is a mystical
mystical fantasy:
fantasy The coming
:
coming age, age, in in which the essence
of modem
modern technology-the
technology the steadily rotating recurrence of
steadily rotating
the same--will
same will come to to light, might have taught
light, might taught man that
a thinker's
thinker's essential
essential thoughts.
thoughts do not not become in in any
any way way
less
less true simply
simply because we fail to think them.
fail to
With his his thought
thought of the eternal recurrence of of the same,
same,
Nietzsche thinks what Schelling Schelling speaks speaks of of when he tells
tells us
that all
all philosophy
philosophy strives
strives toto find thethe highest
highest expression
expression for
primal
primal being
being as as the will.
will. One thing thing remains,
remains, however,
however, to
which everyevery thinker must give thought. Nietzsche's
give thought. Nietzsche's atat-
1:10
110 WHAT
IS CAL&EB THINKING?
tempt to think the

tempt the Being
Being of lyings
beings makes it it almost obtru
obtnl-
sively dear
sively to us modems
clear to moderns that
that all
all thinking,
thinking, that
that is,
is, related-
related-
ness to
ness to Being
Being,? is
is still
still difficult.
difficult. Aristotle
Aristotle describes
describes this
this
difficulty as
difficulty as follows (Metaphysics, Ch. 1,
follows (Metaphysics, 1, Bk.
Bk. 2,
2, 993b)
993b) : :
yap ra T&y
"(fx:rTTE.P yctp TWP Fwerp8&>i>
VVKTt:pi.Swv O/A.JLWITCZ.
OJJ-JULTa irpos
'1Tp0S TO
t/>Eyyos EXE£ ro p.Ef!Tjp.{.pav, oVrW Kat rTjs 7JJJ-ErEpas
't'"IVI'> 0o ,.. 7rpot;
POVS ' ra' 'T1J
,.. 'f'VCTE£
,/.... , A... , , ''
po5s -jrpos Ta T^ <^vcrt 'f'aPEpWTaTa
ârepcarara 'lTaVTWV.
eyes in
*4
uJust as it
Jnst as it is
is with bats
bats' eyes respect of
7
in respect of daylight,
daylight, so
so it
it is
is
vision in respect
with our mental vision respect of those things
things which are
by nature most apparent"
by apparent" (that is,? the presence
(that is presence of all
all that
is present)
is present) . The Being
Being of beings
. is the most apparent,
beings is apparent; and
yet we normally
yet, ?
normally do not see it it-and
and ifif we do
do,? only
only with
difficulty.
difficulty.
PART
·-·
TWO
LECTURE
LECTURE
II
·-·
What isis called
called thinking?
thinking? The question
question sounds definite.
definite. It
It
seems unequivocal.
unequivocal. But even a slight reflection
a slight reflection shows it it to
to
have more than one meaning. meaning. No sooner sooner do we ask ask the
the
question
question than we begin begin to to vacillate. Indeed, the
vacillate. Indeed, the ambiguity
ambiguity
of the question
question foils
foils every attempt to
every attempt to push
push toward the the
answer without some further preparation.
preparation.
We must,
We then, clarify
must, then, clarify the ambiguity. The ambiguous-
ambiguity. ambiguous-
ness of the question,
question, "What is is called
called thinking?",
thinking?", conceals
several possible ways of dealing
possible ways dealing with it. it. Getting
Getting ahead of
ourselves,
ourselves, we may may stress four ways
stress four ways in which the questionquestion
can be posed.
posed.
"What is is called
called thinking?"
thinking?" sayssays for one thing,thing, and in
the first
first place:
place what is
: is it
it we call "thought" and "thinking,"
caU "thought" "thinMng,"
what do these words signify?signify? What is is it to which we give
it to give
the name "thinking"?
"thinking"?
"What is is called
called thinking?"
thinking?" sayssays also,
also, in
in the second place
place ::
how does traditional

traditional doctrine conceive and define
doctrine conceive define what we
have named thinking?
thinking? What is is it
it that
that for two and a half
thousand years
years has been regarded
regarded as as the basic
basic characteristic
characteristic
of thinking?
thinking? Why Why does the traditional doctrine of thinking thinking
bear the curious titletitle "logic"?
"logic"?
"What is is called
called thinking?"
thinking?" says says further,
further, in the third
place :
prerequisites we need so
place: what are the prerequisites so that we may
may be
113
115
114 WHAT
IS CALLED THINKING?
able to
able to think with essential rightness? What is
essential lightness? is called
called for on
part in
our part in order
order that
that we maymay each
each time achieve good
good
thinking?
thinMng?
u
What is
"What is called
called thinking?"
thinking?" says
says finally,,
finally, in
in the fourth
place:
place : what is is it
it that
that calls
calls us,
us, as
as it
it were,
were, commands us to to
think? What is is it
it that
that calls
calls us into
into thinking?
thinking?
These areare four
four ways
ways inin which we can can ask
ask the question,
question,
and bring
bring itit closer
closer to to an answer by by corresponding
corresponding analyses.
analyses.
These four ways ways of of asking
asking the question
question are not just just super
super-
ficially strung
ficially strung together.
together. They
They are are all interrelated. What is
all interrelated. is
disturbing
disturbing about the the question, therefore, lies
question, therefore, lies less
less in the
multiplicity
multiplicity of of its possible meanings
its possible meanings than in in the single
single
meaning
meaning toward which all all four ways
ways are pointing. We must
are pointing.
consider
consider whether only only one of the four
of the four ways
ways isis the right
right one,
one,
while the
while the others prove to
others prove to be incidental
incidental and untenable;
untenable; or or
whether allall four of of them areare equally necessary because they
equally necessary they
are
are unified
unified and of of a piece. But how are
a piece. are they
they unified,
unified, and
by
by what unity?
unity? Is Is oneness added to the multiplicity
multiplicity of the
four ways
ways as as a fifth
fifth piece,
piece, like
like a roof to to four walls? Or does
one of the four ways ways of asking question take prece
asking the question prece-
dence? Does this this precedence
precedence establish
establish a rank order within
the group
group of questions?
questions? Does the rank order exhibit exhibit a struc
struc-
ture by
by which the four ways ways are are coordinated and yet yet sub-
sub
ordinated to to the one that is is decisive?
decisive?
The four ways ways we have mentioned,
mentioned, in in which the the ques
ques-
tion "What is
tion is called
called thinking?"
thinking?" may may be asked,
asked, do not stand
side
side by
by side,
side, separate
separate and unrelated. They They belong
belong together
together
by
by virtue of a union that is is enjoined
enjoined by by one of the the four
ways.
ways. However,
However, we must go go slow,
slow, one stepstep at
at a time,
time, ifif we
are to
to become aware how this this is
is so. We must therefore
so. We therefore be be-
gin
gin our attempt
attempt with a statement which will will at
at first
first remain
aa mere assertion.
assertion. It It runs:
runs :
The meaning
meaning of the question question which we noted in in the
fourth place
place tells
tells us how the questionquestion would want to to be
first in the decisive way.
asked first way, "What is is called
called thinking-
thinking
what does call call for thinking?" Properly
thinking?" Properly understood,understood, the the
PART II
PAl\T 115
question
question asks what it it is
is that
that commands us to to enter into
thought,
thought, that calls
calls on us to to think.
think* The turn tum ofof phrase, "What
"\Vhat
does call
caU for thinking?,"
thinking?/' could of of course
course intend
intend no more
than "what does the term 'thinking' 1
linking signifysignify to to us?" But

the question
question as it it is really asked,
is really asked, "what does does cal for think-
call for
ing
ing on our part?,"
part?/' means something
something else. else. It means: what is
It means : is
it
it that directs
directs us into
into thought,
thought, and gives gives usus directions
directions for for
thinking?
thinking?
Accordingly,
Accordingly 7 does the question question ask ask what it it is
is that
that gives
gives
us the impetus
impetus to to think on each occasion
occasion and with regard regard toto
a particular
particular matter? No. The directions directions thatthat come from
what directs
directs us into
into thought
thought are are much more than merely merely
the given
given impetus
impetus to to do some thinking.
thinking.
That which directs
directs usus to
to think, gives us directions
think, gives directions in in such
a way
way that we first first become capablecapable of of thinking,
thinking, and thus
are as
as thinkers,
thinkers, only
only by
by virtue
virtue of of its directive. It
its directive. is true,
It is true, of
u
course,
course, that
that the question
question "What What doesdoes call
call for
for thinking
thinking?," ?/
T
in the sense of "What calls calls on us to to think?/'

think?," is is foreign
foreign to to
understanding. But we are
the common rmderstanding. are all
all the less
less entitled
entitled
simply
simply to to overlook the fact that the question
fact that question "What is is
called
called thinking?"
thinking?" presents
presents itself
itself atat first
first quite
quite innocently*
innocently.
It
It sormds
sounds as as if,
if, and we rmknowingly
unknowingly take it it as
as if,
if, the ques
ques-
tion
tion merely
merely asked for more precise precise information about what
is supposedly
is supposedly meant when we speak speak of such a thingthing as as think
think-
ing.
ing. Thinking
Thinking here appears appears as as a theme with which one
might
might deal as as with anyany other.
other. Thus thinking
thinking becomes the
object
object ofof an investigation.
investigation. The investigation
investigation considers
considers a
process
process that occurs in man. Man takes takes a special
special part
part in the
process,
process, in that he performs
performs the thinking.
thinking. Yet this this fact,
fact, that
man isis naturally
naturally the performer
performer of of thinking,
thinking, need not fur- fur
ther concern the investigation
investigation of thinking. The fact
of thinking. fact goes
goes
without saying.
saying. Being
Being irrelevant,
irrelevant, it it may
may be leftleft out of of our
reflection
reflection on thinking.
thinking. Indeed,
Indeed, it it must be left left out.
out. For the
laws of
of thought
thought are are after
after all
all valid independently of
valid independently of the man
who performs
performs the individual acts thinking.
of thinking*
acts of
But ifif the question
question "What does does call
call for thinking?" is
for thinking?" is
116 WHAT
THJNltiNG?
asking what it It is
is that first of
of all
all directs us to to think, then we
are
art asking for for something that concerns ourselves because it it
calls upon us, n$ upon our very being. It
?
is we ourselves to
It is to
whom the the question "'\Vhat is is called thinking-what does
call
call for
for thinking?" is is addressed directly. We '\Ve ourselves are are
in
in the
the text and texture of the question. The question "What
of the "VVhat
calls on us us toto think?" has has already drawn us us into the the sub-
stance of of the
the inquiry. We ourselves are are,? in
in the strict
strict sense
of
of the
the word, put pat in
in question by question. The question
the question.
by the question
"'\Vhat calls on us us toto think?" strikes us us directly,
directly, like
like a
lightning bolt. Asked in in this way,
way the
?
question "What
the question "vVhat doesdoes
thinking call call for?"
for?" does more than merely merely struggle
struggle with an
object, inin the
the manner of of a
a scientific problem.
scientific problem.
This other formulation
formulation of of the question^
question, which strikes strikes usus
as
as strange, is is open
open to
to the following
following immediate objection. objection.
The new meaning meaning of of the
the question
question "What"VVhat does does call
call for
for
thinking?"
thinking?" has been obtained here here byby arbitrarily
arbitrarily forcing
forcing on
the question a signification
signification totally different from the
totally different the one
that all
all the world would attach to it it on hearing
hearing or or reading
reading
it.
it. This trick
trick isis easily
exposed. It
easily exposed. obviously relies
It obviously relies on aa mere-
mere.
play
play with words. And the victim of of the
the play
play is is the word
which,
which as the verb of
?
of the question, sustains the
question, sustains the sentence
sentence
"What is
"VVhat called thinking?"
is called
thinking?" We are are playing
playing with the the verb
"to call."
call."
One might
might ask, ask for instance: "What do you
?
you call
call that
that
village
village up up there on the hill?" hill? We want to to know the the name
1'
of the village.
village. Or we may may ask: "What shall shall we call call the
the
child?" That says: says what name shall
: shall it
it bear?
bear? "What is is called
called
thinking?"
thinking?" means, means then,?
then what idea
?
shall we form about
idea shall about
the process
process toto which has been given given the
the name "thinking"?
"thinking"?
This is is how we understand the question if
question if we take take itit simply
simply
and naturally.
naturally.
if we are
But if are toto hear the question in aa sense
sense which asks asks
question in
for what it it is
is that directs
directs us to think,7 we find
to think fmd ourselves
ourselves
suddenly
suddenly compelled
compelled to to accept
accept the verb
verb "to
"to call"
call" in in aa signifi-
signifi-
PART
PAl\TII
II U7
117
cation that
that is
is strange
strange to to us
us,? or
or at
at least no longer familiar.
We are now supposed
\Ve are supposed toto use
use the
the word "to in aa sig-
"to call" in
might paraphrase approximately with
nification which one might
nifieation
the verbs
the verbs "invite,
"invite, demand, direct." We
demand, instruct, direct." '\Ve call
call 0tt
on
someone who is is in
in our way
way toto give way,
way, toto make room.
But the
But the "call"
"call" does
does not necessarily
necessarily imply
imply demand, still less
command; it
command; it rather
rather implies
implies an anticipatory
anticipatory reaching outout
for something
for something that
that is
is reached
reached byby our call,
call, through our call-
ing.
ing.
In the
In the widest sense,
sense, "to call"
call" means to set
to- in motion, to
set in to
get something
get something underway
underway-which which may may be done in in aa gentle
and therefore
therefore unobtrusive
unobtrusive manner,
manner, and in in fact
fact is
is most read
read-
ily
ily done that that way.
way. In the older version of
older Greek version of the New
Testament, Matthew 8
Testament, :18, we find:
8:18, ""'8ooJI' c 6o Ifcrots
find: "18F
oxA.ov
OXÔF 'lTEpt dvrov EKEAElXTEJI
<2T/>i aln-Ov a:Tri>..(Niv cfe
eceXewa' aCTeX&i? 'Uipa:v--Seeing aa
ECS TO vlpav
large
large crowd around him, him, he called to them to
called to to go
go to
to the
the other
other
side."
aide." The Greek verb /ceXafeo' properly properly means to get some
to get some-
thing
thing on the road, road to get
7 get it underway. The Greek noun
it underway.
K€A.ev8ot;
fclXcvtfos means way. way. And that the the old
old word "to"to call"
call" means
not
not soso much a command as as a letting-reach,
letting-reach, that that therefore
the
the "call"
"call" has an assonance of helpfulness helpfulness and complai- complai
sance,
sance, isis shown by by the fact
fact that thethe same word in Sanskrit
still means something
still something like like "to invite."
invite."
The meaning
meaning of of the word "call" which we have dede
scribed
scribed is altogether unfamiliar to us. It still
is thus not altogether still is
is
unaccustomed as we encounter it
as we it in the question "What is
question "'\Vhat is
called
called thinking-what call for it?"
thinking what does does call it?" When we hear that
question,
question, the meaning
meaning of of "call" in in the sense of "instruct,
"instruct,
demand,
demand, allow to to reach,
reach, getget on the way, way, convey,
convey, provide
provide
with
with aa way"
way" doesdoes not immediately
immediately occur to us. We are not
to us. We
so
so much at at home with these meaningsmeanings of the word that we
hear
hear them at at first,
first,
let
let alone
alone first
first of all. We do not have the
all. We
habit,
habit, or or only
only just
just barely,
barely, of of using
using the word "call" in in this
this
sense.
sense. And
And so so it
it remains
remains unfamiliar to us. us. Instead,
Instead, we fol- fol
low
low thethe habitual
habitual signification
signification of the verb "to call,"
the call," and
t18
IIS IS CALLED THYNKIN6?
WHAT Ill THINitiNG?
mostly stay within it, lt not giving it

t
it much thought. "To **T0 call"
just rimply means to 10 give this 0r or that name. lii In that signifi-
cation, the llie word is is current among us. us. And why do we
prefer the the customary meaning, even unknowingly? Pre-
sumably becau.o;e the the unaccustomed and apparently uncus-
tomary signification of of the
the word "to"to calP is its
call" is its proper one: :
the one
thft on* that is Is innate to to the
the word, and thus remains the the
only one--for from its Its native realm stem all all the
the other.
"To
**Tf> call,"
tall/* inia short, means **to "to command/' provided we
command," provided
hear this word, too, in in its
Its native, telling sense. For "to "to
command" basically means, not not to
to give commands and
orders, but to to commend, entrust, give into safe-keeping,safe-keeping,
keep safE>ly. To call call means: to to call
call into
into arrival
arrival and pres- pres-
ence; to to address commendingly.
commendingly.
Accordingly, when we hear our question question "What is is called
called
thinking?" in in the
the sense that it asks, What is
that it is it
it that
that appeals
appeals
to us
to ms toto think?, we then are asking: What is : is it
it that
that enjoins
enjoins
our
mir nature to to think,
think, and thus lets thought,
lets our nature reach thought,
arrive in thinking, there to keep it it safe?
safe?
When we ask
'When ask in
ia this
this way
way we d, do, of
of course,
course, use the the word
A
*to call"
"to call" in a rather unfamiliar signification.signification. But it it is
is
unhabitual not because our spoken speech has never yet
spoken speech yet
been at at home in it, but rather because we are
in it, are no longer
longer at at
home with this
horne this telling
telling word,
word, because we no longer longer really
really
live
live inin it.
it.
We turn back to
We to the originally habitual significance
originally habitual significance of of
the word "to "to call,"
call/ and ask:ask "What is is it
it that
that calls
calls on us to to
1
:
think?"
think?
77
Is
1$ this
this return a whim, whim, or playing
playing games?
games? Neither one
nor the other.other. IfIf we maymay talk
talk here ofof playing
playing games
games at at all,
all,
it
it is
is not we who play play with words,
words, but thethe nature of of language
language
plays
plays with us, us not only
? only in this case, not only
this case, only now,
now, but long long
since and always.always. For language plays with our speech
language plays speech-it it
likes
likes to to let
let our speech
speech drift
drift away into the
away into the more obvious
obvious
meanings
meanings of words. It It is
is as
though man had to
as though to make an
PAHY II
PAl\T 119
IIS
effort to live properly

properly with language. It It Is
is as
as though such
a dwelling were especially prone to to succumb to the danger
to the
of commonness.
of
The place of language language properly inhabited, and of of its
its
habitual words,
words is?
is usurped by common tenns. The common
usurped by
speech becomes the current oirre&t speech. We meet it it on all
all sides,
and since it it is common to
is COIIllnon all, we now accept it
to all, it as
as the
the only
standard. Anything
Anything that that departs
departs from this commonness, in in
order to inhabit the formerly formerly habitual proper speech of of
language,
language, is is at
at once considered
considered a a violation of of the
the standard.
It
It is
is branded as as a frivolous
frivolous whim. All All this is in fact quite
is in
in
in order,
order, as as soon as as we regard
regard the the common as as the
the only
legitimate
legitimate standard,
standard, and become generally incapable of of
fathoming
fathoming the commonness of the common. This flounder-
of the
ing
ing in a commonness which we haTe have placed
placed under the the
protection of so-called
protection so-called natural common sense, is not aa:i-
is not
dental,
dental, nor are we free free to
to deprecate
deprecate it. it. This floundering
floundering in in
commonness is is part of the high and dangerous game and
part high dangerous game
gamble
gamble in which, which, by by the nature of language, we are
of language ?
are the
stakes.
stakes.
Is
Is it playing with words when we attempt
it playing attempt to to give
give heed
to this game
to this game of language
language and to to hear what language
language reallyreally
says when it
says speaks? If
it speaks? If we succeed in in hearing
hearing that,that, then
it
it may
may happen-provided
happen provided we proceed proceed carefully
carefully-that that we
get
get more trulytruly toto the matter that is is expressed
expressed in in any
any telling
telling
and asking.
asking.
We give
We give heed to to the real
real signification
signification of the the word **to "to
call,"
call/' and accordingly
accordingly ask our question, question, "What does does think
think-
ing call for?" in
ing call in this
this way:
way: what is is it
it that
that directs
directs us intointo
thinking,
thinking, that calls calls on us to to think? But after all, the word
after all,
"to call"
call" means also, also, and commonly,
commonly, to give a name to
to give
something.
something. The current meaning meaning of of the
the word cannot simply simply
be pushed
pushed asideaside in favor of the rare rare oneone, even though
?
though the
rare signification
signification may may still
still be the
the real one. That would be
real one.
an open
open violation
violation of language. Besides, the
language. Besides, presently more
the presently
120
lit W H AT IS C A L L ED TIIINKINC?
T 111 N :1. I :N G ?
current signification of of the

the word '"call" is is not
not totally uncon-
nected andand unrelated to to the
the real one. On the
real one. the contrary, the the
presently c.ustornary signification Is is rooted in in the
the other,
original, dt>tisive one. For, what is is itit that the the word **to "to
name'' tells us? us?
\\'hen we name aa thing, we furnish It it with a name. But
what about this this furnishing? After all all, the
7
the name is is not just
just
draped over the thing. On the
over the the other hand, no one will will deny
that the
the name is is coordinated with the the thing as as an object. If If
we conceive the the situation in in this way, we turn the name,
too, into an
too, an object. We 'Ye see the relation between name and
see the
thing asas the
the coordination of of two objects. The coordination
in
in turn is is by
by way of an object, which we can see
of an see and con-
ceive and deal with and describe according according to to its
its various
various
possibilities. The relation between what is is named and its its
name can always be be conceived as coordination. The only
as aa coordination. only
question is is whether this this correctly conceived coordination
correctly conceived coordination
will ever allow us, us, will allow us at at all,
all, toto give
give heed to to what
constitutes thethe peculiar property of the the name.
To
T0 name something-that is is to
to call
call it it by name. More
by name*
fundamentally, to to name is is to call and clothe
to call clothe something
something
with a word. What is is so
so called,
called, isis then at at the
the call
call ofof the
word. What is is called
called appears as as what is is present,
present, and in in its
its
presence it it is
is brought into
brought into the keeping keeping, it ?
it is
is commanded
commanded, 7
called
called into
into the calling
calling word. So called called by by name,
name, calledcalled into
into
presence, it
a presence, it in
in turn calls. It
tarn calls. It is named, has the
is named, the name. By By
naming,
naming we call
?
call on what is is present
present to to arrive.
arrive. Arrive where?
That remains to to be thought
thought about.about. In any any case,case all
7
all naming
naming
and all
all being named is
being is the familiar
familiar "to call" only
"to call" only because
naming
naming itself
itself consists
consists by by nature in in the real real calling,
calling, in the
call
call to
to come,
come in in a
?
a commending
commending and aa command.
What is is called
called thinking?
thinking? At the outset outset we mentionedmentioned
four ways
ways to question. We said
to ask the question. said thatthat thethe way listed
way listed
in the fourth place place is is the first, first in
first, first in the sensesense of being
being
PART
PAl\T II
II i!
HU
highest in in rank since it it sets

sets the
the standard. ·when we under-
stand the question, "What
the question, "vVhat is is called thinking?," in in the
the sense
that it it is
is aa question
question aboutabout what calls upon us us to to think, we
then have understood
understood the the word **to "to call"
caW' in in its
its proper sig-
nificance. That is
nificance. is to
to say
say also : we now ask
: ask the
the question as as
it properly
it properly wants to to be asked. Presumably we shall now
ahnost automatically
almost automatically get get toto the
the three remaining ways to to
ask the
ask question. It
the question. will therefore
It will therefore be advisable 10 to explicate
the real
the real question
question aa little
little more clearly.
clearly. It It inns:
runs: "What is is
it that
it that calls
calls on usus to
to think?"
think?" What makes aa call call upon ms us that
we should
should think and, and, by by thinking,
thinking, be who we are? are?
That which calls calls usus to think in
to think in this
this way
way presumably can
do
do soso only
only insofar
insofar as as the calling itself,
the calling itself, on its its own,
own, needs
thought. What calls
thought. calls usus toto think,
think, and thus commands, commands, that
is, brings our essential
is, brings
essential nature into into thethe keeping
keeping of of thought,
needs
needs thinking
thinking because
because what calls calls usus wants itself itself to
to be
thought
thought about according
according to to its nature. What calls
its nature. calls on us to to
think,
think, demands for for itself
itself that it it be tended,
tended, cared for, for, hus
hus-
banded in in its
its own essential
essential nature,
nature, by thought. What calls
by thought. calls
on us to to think,
think, gives
gives us food for thought.
for thought.
What givesgives us food for thought thought we call thought-provok-
call thought-provok
ing.
ing. But what is is thought-provoking
thought-provoking not just just occasionally,
occasionally,
and not just just in some given given limited respect,respect, but rather gives gives
food
food for for thought
thought inherently
inherently and hence from the start and
start
always--is
always is that that which is is thought-provoking per
thought-provoking per se. TMs is
$e. This is
what we call call most thought-provoking.

thought-provoking. And what it it gives us
gives
to think about,
to about, the
the gift
gift it it gives
gives to to us,
us, is
is nothing
nothing less less than
itself-itself
itself itself which calls
calls on us to to enter thought.
thought.
The question
question "What is is called thinking?" asks for what
called thinking?"
wants
wants to be thought
to be thought about in the pre-eminent pre-eminent sense: sense it
: it does
not
not just
just give
give usus something
something to to think about,about, nor only only itself,
itself,
but it it first
first gives
gives thought
thought and thinking thinking to us, us, it it entrusts
thought
thought to to us
us as
as our essential
essential destiny,
destiny, and thus first first joins
joins
and
and appropriates
appropriates us us to
to thought.
thought.
122 IS CALL ED TTHINKING?
WHAT IS H INJt ING?
Summary and Tran..<dtion

The question "'What is
Is called thinking?" can
caa be asked in
four ways. It It asks: : \\
t1 . 'What is
. is designated by by the word "thinking?"
"thinking?"
2.
2* \Vhat does the prevailing theory of thought, namely
logic, understand by by thinking?
3.
5* What are the the prerequisites we need to to perform
perform think-think
ing
ing rightly?
4. \\"hat is it that commands us to think?
·we
We assert: the: the fourth question must be asked first. first, Once
the nature of thinking is is in question, the

in qwe$tion 7
the fourth is is the
decisive question. But this is is not to to say that the first

say that first three
three
questions stand apart, outside the fourth. Rather,7 they
fourth. Rather they
point to to tl1e fourth. The first three
the fourth. tl1ree questions
questions subordinate
themselves to the fourth
to the f which itself
itself determines
determines the the struc
struc-
ture within which the four ways ways of asking belong belong together.
together.
We might say
We question,y What is
say also: the fourth question
: is it
it that
that
calls on us to think?,
think?, develops explicates itself
develops and explicates itself in in such
a way
way that it it calls forth the other three. three. But how the four
questions belong
belong together
together within the decisive decisive fourth ques- ques-
tion, that is
tion, is something
something we cannot find fmd outout by
by ingenuity.
ingenuity. It It
must reveal itself itself toto us.
us. And it it will
will do so so only
only if if we let let
ourselves become involved in die the questioning
questioning of of the
the ques
ques-
tion. To do that,
tion. that, we must strikestrike out on a way. way. The way way
seems to to be implicit
implicit in in the fact
fact that
that the
the fourth
fourth question
question is is
the decisive one. And the way
decisive one. way must set set out
out from thisthis ques
ques-
tion, since
tion, since the other three three, too,
7too, coine
come down to to it.
it. Still,
Still, itit is
is
not atat aH certain whether we are asking
all certain asking thethe fourth
fourth question
question
in the right
in right way if if we begin
begin our
our questioning
questioning withwith it. it.
The thing
thing that is is in substance
substance and and byby nature
nature first,
first, need
need
not
not stand
stand at at the
the beginning
beginning--in fact, perhaps
in fact, perhaps it it cannot.
cannot. The
first and the
first the beginning identical. We must therefore
beginning are not identical. therefore
first explore
first explore thethe four waysways inin which
which the the question
question may may be be
PAHT 11
PART II 123
asked. The fourth way way will probably prove to be decisive;

to be
yet another way
yet way remains unavoidable, which we must first
find and travel to get get to the fourth, decisive one. This situa-
tion alone tells us that the for us decisive way of of asking 0orour
question, "What is is called thinking?," is is still
still remote and &d
seems almost strange
strange to to us. It becomes necessary, then, first
us. It
to acquaint
to ourselves explicitly
acquaint ourselves explicitly with the the ambiguity of of the
the
question,
question, not only only to give give attention to to that ambiguity as as
such,
swch but also
7
also in order that we may may notnot take it it 100
too lightJy7
as
as a mere matter of linguistic
linguistic expression.
The ambiguity
ambiguity of the the question
question "What is is called think-
ing?"
ing?" lies
lies in the ambiguity of
ambiguity of the the questioning verb "to
call."
call."
The frequent
frequent idiom "what **what we call"call" signifies: what we
have just
just said is meant in
said is in substance
substance in in this
this or way, is
or that way 7
is
to be understood this this wayway or that.that. Instead
Instead of of "what we
call,"
call/' we also
also use the idiom "that is is to
to say."
say,"
On a dayday of changeable
changeable weather,
weather, someone might might leave
leave aa
mountain lodge,
lodge, alone,
alone, to climb a peak. peak. He soon loses loses Mshis
way
way in the fog fog that has suddenly descended. He has no
suddenly descended.
notion of what we call mountaineering. He does
call mountaineering. does not know
any
any of the things
things it it calls
calls for, things that
all the things
for, all that must be
taken into account and mastered.
A voice calls
A calls to
to us to hope. It
to have hope. It beckons us to hope,
to hope,
invites
invites us,
us, commends us, us 7 directs
directs us toto hope.
hope.
This town is is called
Freiburg. It
called Freiburg. so named because that
is so
It is that
is what it
is it has been called.
called. This means
means: the t0wn
r town has been
called
called to
to assume this this name. Henceforth it it is
is at
at the call
call of
this
this name to to which it it has been commended. To caU is not
call is
originally
originally to to name,
name, but the other way way around : naming
: naming is is
a kind ofof calling,
calling, in the original sense of
original sense of demanding
demanding and
commending. It
commending. It is
is not that the call call has its its being
being inin the
name;
name$ rather every every name is is a kind of of call.
call. Every call im
Every call im-
plies
plies an approach,
approach, and thus, thus, ofof course,
course, the possibility
possibility of
giving
giving a name. We We might
might call guest welcome. This does
call a guest
124
184 WHAT IS
is CALL ED THINK-ING"!
not mean that we attach to to him thethe name "\Velcome,"

"Welcome," but but
that we call call him to to come in in and complete his his arrival as as a
welcome friend. In la that way, the the welcome-call of of the
invitation to come in is nonetheless also an act
In is act of
of naming, a
calling which makes the the newcomer what we cal call a guest
whom we are are glad to to see.
But calling is is something else than merely making a
sound. Something else, again essentially different from

mere sound and mud noise, is is the
the cry.
cry. The crycry need not be a call,
call,
but
but may be: fee the
: the cry
cry ofof distress. In reality, the calling stems
from the tic place to to which the out. The calling is
call goes out,
the call is
informed by by an original outreach toward. toward. . . . This alone
. . . alone
is
is why the
the call
call can make a a demand. The mere cry cry dies
dies away
away
and collapses. It It can offer
offer no lasting abode to to either
either pain
pain
or
or joy.
}oy The call, by contrast, is a reaching,
call, by contrast^ is a reaching, even if
if it
it is
is
neither heard nor answered. Calling offers an abode.
Calling offers abode. Sound
and crycry and call must be clearly distinguished.
clearly distinguished.
The call is is the directive
directive which,
which in?
in calling
calling to
to and calling
calling
upon, in in reaching out and inviting, directs us toward an
mvitiuag7 directs
action or or non-action,
non-action, or toward something something even more essenessen-
tial.
tiaL In every
every calling,
calling^ a call
cal has already
already gathered.
gathered. The call call-
ing
ing isis not a call
cal that has gone gone byby, but one that
7
that has gone
gone out
and as as such is is still
still calling and inviting; it
calling inviting; it calls
calls even if if it
it
makes no sound.
As soon as as we understand the word "to call" call" in
in its
its origi
origi-
nal root
root significance,
significance, we hear the the question
question "What is is called
called
thinking?"
thinidng?" in a a different way. We then hear the
different way. the question
question: :
"What is is That which calls cals on us to to think,

think, in
in the
the sense
sense that
that
it
it originally directs
originally directs us to to thinking thereby entrusts
thinking and thereby entrusts to to
us our own essential
essential nature as such which is
such-which insofar as
is insofar as it
it
thinks?"
What is is it
it that calls
calls on us to think? As we develop
to think? develop thethe
question,
question, it it asks:
asks: where does the calling come from that
the calling that
calls on us to think? In what does this
calls this calling
calling consist?
consist? How
can itit make its its claim on us? How does does the calling reach
the calling reach us?us?
PAET
PAll. T II
II 125
125
How does it It reach do\-vn into our very nature, in in order to to

demand from us us that
that ourour nature be be aa thinking nature?
\Vhat is Is our
our nature?
nature? Can Can we we know it it at all? If
at all? If there can
can be
be
no
no knowledge here, here, then in in what way is is our nature revealed
to us? Perhaps in
to us? in just
just this
this way,
way, and only in in this
this way,
way, that
we are
we are called
called upon
upon to to think?
think?
"What is is it
it that
that calls
calls onon us to to think?" We find find that
that we
ourselves are are put
put in question,
question,, this
this question,
question^ as as soon as as we
tru.ly
truly ask it,it, not
not just
just rattle
rattle itit off.
off.
from what other source could
But from could the the calling into
thought
thought come than from from something
something that that inin itself needs
thought,
thought, because the source of of the
the calling wants to ID be
be
thought
thought about by by its
its very
very nature,
nature^ and not not just
just now and
then? That which calls calls on us to to think and appeals to to us
us to
to
think,
think 7 claims thought
thought for itselfitself and as own because in
its own,
as its ?
in
and byby itself
itself it
it gives food for thought-not
gives thought not just occasionally
occasionally
but now and always.
always.
What so givesgives food for thought thought is is what we call call most
thought-provoking.
thought-provoking. Nor does it it give
give only
only what always
always re re-
mains toto be thought about; it
thought about; it gives food for
gives for thought
thought in in the
much wider-reaching
wider-reaching and decisive sense sense that
that it
it first
first entrusts
entrusts
thought
thought and thinking
thinking to to us as what determines our nature. nature.
LECTURE
LECTURE
.-.
II
II
What is is most thought-provoking

thought-provoking gives gives food for for thought
thought in in
the original sense that it it gives us over,
gives over, delivers
delivers us to to
thought. This gift,gift, which gives to us what is
gives to is most thought-
thought-
provoking, is is the true
true endowment that that keeps itself
itself concealed
concealed
in our essential nature.
nature.
*
When we ask, then, then, .. What is
6
is it
it that calls
calls on us to to
think?," we are looking both to what it
tfaixik?," it is
is that gives
gives to us the
gift of this endowment,
endowment, and to ourselves,
ourselves, whose nature lies lies
gifted with this endowment. We
in being gifted We are capable
capable of
thinking only
only insofar
insof ar as we are endowed with what is is most
thought-provoking,
thought-provoking, gifted gifted with what ever and always always wants
to be thought
thought about.
Whether we are in any any given case capable
given case capable of of thinking,
thinking,
that is,
is whether we accomplish
7 accomplish it it in
in the fitting
fitting manner,
manner,
depends
depends on whether we are inclined to to think,
think, whether,
whether, that
is we will let
is,
?
let ourselves become involved with the nature of
thinking.
thinking. It It could be that we incline
incline tootoo slightly
slightly and too too
rarely
rarely toto let
let ourselves become so involved. And that is is so
so not
because we are all all too indolent, occupied with other
indolent, or occupied other
matters and disinclined to to think,
think ? but because the the involve
involve-
ment with thought
thought is is in itself
itself a rare thing,
thing, reserved for for
few people.
people.
What we have said must for the moment be sufficient sufficient
explanation
explanation of the fourth way way in which we ask ask the
the ques-
ques-
126
PAHT II
PABT 17
127
tion "What is is called thinking?" in in the

the decisive way. How-
ever, our explanation has itself constantly been talking
about thinking. We We already have, then, an understanding
of
of the
the words "thought"
"thought" and "thinking., in in their broad out-
lines, even if if it
it be only the vague meaning that by thinking
by
we understand something that is is done fay by an act act of
of the
the
human spirit. We speak of acts of
spirit. "\-Ve of will, but also of of acts of
of
thought.
thought.
Precisely
Precisely when we ask, ask, "What is is it
it that calls on us to to
think?,"
think?, we reflect
15
reflect not only
only on the the source of of the
the calling, but
with equal
equal resolution
resolution on what it it ca1ls on us to to do
do--we re-
we re
flect
flect on thinking.
thinking. Thus,Tfaus7 when we are are called upon, we are are
not only
only commanded and called upon to do something, but
called upon
that
that something
something itself is named in
itself is in the
the call.
call. In the
the wording
of
of the question,
question, the word "think" is is not
not just aa sound. All
All of
of
us have already
already had some ideas ideas about the word "think," "think,**
however vague.
vague. True,
True, all all of usus should
should be greatly
greatly embar
embar-
rassed ifif we had to to say,
say straight
7
unequivocally,
straight out and unequivocally ?
what itit is
is that the verb "to think" designates* designates. But,
But, luckily,
luckily,
we do not have to to say,
say we only
y
are supposed
only are supposed to to let
let ourselves
ourselves
become involved in the question. question. And if do, we are
if we do, are
already
already asking:
asking: what is is it
it to
to which the word "thinking"
"thiaMng"
gives
gives aa name? HavingHaving started
started with the the decisive
decisive fourth ques
ques-
tion,
tion, we find
find ourselves
ourselves involved in in the
the first
first question
question asas well.
well.
What is is it
it to
to which the word "thinking"
"thinking" givesgives a name?
We hear the words "think,"
We "thinking." As
"thought," "thinking.**
"think/' "thought/''
the saying
the saying goes,
goes? we attach a meaningmeaning to them. What comes
to
to our minds here is is at
at first
first fleeting blurred. Most of
fleeting and blurred.
the
the time,
time, we can leave leave itit at
at that. It satisfies
that. It satisfies the demands of of
common speechspeech in usual communication. Such communi communi-
cation
cation does
does not want to to lose
lose time tarrying
tarrying over the sense sense of
of
individual
individual words. Instead, Instead words are constantly
?
constantly thrown
around on the cheap, process are worn out. There
cheap, and in the process
is a curious
is curious advantage
advantage in that. that. With a worn-out language language
everybody
everybody can talk talk about everything.
everything.
But what if if we ask specifically
specifically what it it is
is to
to which the
128
12S IS C ALL ED THINKING?
W H AT 18 T H I :S E. I N G ?
word, here the the word "thinking," gives aa name? Then we we

attend to to the
the word as as word. Thi# This Isis what happened earlier
with the the word **to .. to call." We 'We are
are here venturing into into thethe
gambling game of of language, where our our nature isis atat stake.
Nor can can wewe avoid that venture, once we ,,.e have become aware
that-and in in what way-thought and and poesy, each in in its
its
OV."'Il unmistakable fashion, ore the essential telling.
are the
According to to the
the common view, view, both thought and and poesy
use language merely as
ns as their medium and aa means of of ex-
ex-
pression, just as sculpture, painting, and
just as operate and
and music operate and
express themselves in in the
the medium of of stone and wood and and
color and and tone. But presumably stone and wood and color
But presumably color
and tone, too,
and too, exhibit aa different nature in art, once we get
in art, get
over seeing art art aesthetically,
aesthetically, that that is,
is, from the
the point
point ofof view
of expression and impression
of impression-the the work as as expression,
expression, and
the impression as
the experience.
as experience.
Language
Language is is neither
neither merely
merely the field expression, nor
field of expression, nor
merely the the means of of expression,
expression, nor merely the two jointly.
merely the jointly.
Thought
Thought and poesy never just just use language
language to to express
express
themselves with its its help;
help; rather, thought and poesy
rather., thought poesy areare inin
themselves the the originary,
originary, the the essential, therefore also
essential, and therefore also
the
the final speechspeech that that language
language speaks through the
speaks through the mouth
of
of man.
To speakspeak language
language is is totally
totally different
different from employing
employing
language.
language. Common speech speech merely
merely employs
employs language.
language. This TMs
relation
relation to to language
language is is just
just what constitutes its common
its common-
ness. because thought

ness. But because thought and, and, inin a a different
different way poesy,
poesy, do
not
not employ
employ terms terms but but speak
speak words,
words, therefore we are com-
pelled,
pelled, as as soon
soon as as wewe set
set out
out upon
upon a way way of thought,
thought, to give give
specific attention to what the
specific attention to what the word says. word says.
At
At first,
first, words
words may may easily
easily appear
appear to to be terms.
terjns. Terms,
Terms, in in
their
their turn,
turn, first
first appear
appear spoken
spoken when they they are
are given
given voice.
voice.
Again,
Again, this this is
is at
at first sound. It
first aa sound. It is
is perceived
perceived byby the
the senses.
senses.
What is
What is perceived
perceived by by the
the senses
senses is is considered
considered as as immedi-
immedi
ately
ately given.
given. The The word's
word's signification
signification attaches to its
attaches to its sound.
sound.
PA IT
PART II
II 129
lit
That constituent of of thethe word-signification-cannot be be

perceived by by the
the senses. What'What is is non-st-nsual in in the
the tenns is is
their sense, their signification. Accordingly, we speak of of
sense-giving acts that furnish the the word-sound ·with aa sense.
Terms thus become either full full ofof sense, or or more meaning-
ful. The terms are
fuL are like buckets
buckets or or kegs out out of
of which we can
scoop sense.
Our scientifically
scientifically organized
organized dictionaries list list these ves-
sels of
of sense
sense in in alphabetical
alphabetical order order, each
?
each entered and de de-
scribed according to
scribed according to its
its two constituents,
constituents, sound-structure
sense-content. When
and sense-content. VY"hen we are are specially
specially concerned with
what the the word teUs tells us,
us we stay
7
stay \-vith our dictionaries.
This
This is is how things look at
things look at first. Indeed, this "at first"
first. Indeed, first'' does
on the
the whole and from the the start
start determine
determine the the idea we have
of the usual
of the usual ways
ways of of being
being concerned with the word. On the
with the the
strength
strength of of this
this idea,
idea, we then judge judge thethe procedure
procedure of any
thinking
thinking that that isis concerned with the word. We judge
the word. judge thethe
procedure
procedure now favorably,favorably, now unfavorably
unfavorably,? but always always
with reservations.
reservations. Whatever our judgments judgments may may turn out
to
to be,
be, they
they are all all baseless
baseless as as long
long as as it
it is
is not clear
clear by
by what
they are
they are supported.
supported. For they are in
they are in fact
fact supported
supported by by that
that
"at
"at first"
first" which lookslooks on terms as as terms,
terms, not just
just at
at first
first but
always,
always, which looks looks on them, that is,
them, that is, as
as kegs
kegs and buckets.
buckets.
What about this this much-invoked "at first"? first"{
What we encounter at at first
first is
is never what is is near,
near, but
always
always only only what is is common. It possesses the unearthly
It possesses unearthly
power
power to to break us of the habit of of abiding
abiding in what is is essen-
essen
tial, often
tial, often so so definitively
definitively that we never come to abide anyany
where.
When we hear directly directly what is spoken directly,
is spoken directly, we do
not atat first
first hear the words as terms, still
as terms, still less
less the terms as
mere sound.
sound. In order
order to to hear the pure pure resonance of a mere
sound,
sound, we must first first remove ourselves
ourselves from the sphere sphere
where speech
speech meets with understanding
understanding or lack of under- under
standing.
standing. We must disregard disregard all all that,
that, abstract from it, it, if
130
150 WHAT CAll*E THINKING?
WHAT IS CALLED THINitiNG?
we
i%e are to 10 extract, subtract only the the sound and resonance
from what is is spoken, if If our ears areare toto catch this abstraction
fey itself, purely acoustkally. Sound, which in
by in the
the concep-
tual field ofof this supposed "at first" first'' isis regarded as as immedi-
ately given, is is an abstract construct that Is is at
at no time per-
ceived alone, by by itself, nor ever at at first, when we hear
something spoken.
Tht- supposedly purely sensual aspect of of the
the word-sound^
word-sound,
conceived as as mere resonance, is is an abstraction. The mere
vibration is is always picked out only by by an intennediate step
-by by that almost unnatural disregard. Even when we hear
speech inin a a language totally
totally unknown to us, we never hear
to us,
mere as
as aa noise present only to
present only to our senses-we we hear
unintelligible words.
words. But between the the unintelligible
unintelligible word word,7
and the
the mere sound grasped in acoustic abstraction^
in acoustic abstraction, lies lies an
of
of difference in in essence.
essence.
Nor
NOT are
are mere tennsterms given
given at first when we hear speech.
at first speech.
As hearers, we abide in in the sphere
sphere of what is is spoken^
spoken, where
the voice
voice of what is said rings without sound.
is said sound. From this this
sphere, whose essential nature we have barely barely caught
caught sight
sight
of,
of y much less thought
thought about, the words disclose
about, the disclose themselves
themselves
which speak in in what is is spoken,
spoken, and which simply simply do* do not
stand out individually.
individually.
Words are not tenns,
vVords terms and thus are
?
are not like like buckets
buckets and
kegs
kegs from which we scoop scoop a content that that is is there.
there. Words are are
wellsprings
wellsprings that are found and dug dug up up in in the
the telling^
telling, well-
well-
springs
springs that must be found and dug dug up up again
again and again again,?
that easily
easily cave in, in, but that at times also-
at times also well
well upup when leastleast
expected.
expected. If If we do not go go to
to the spring
spring againagain and again,
again, the
the
buckets and kegs kegs stay
stay empty,
empty or their
?
their content
content stays
stays stale.
stale.
To pay
pay heed to to what the words say say is is different
different in in essence
essence
from what it it first
first seems to to be, preoccupation with
be a mere preoccupation
?
with
terms. Besides,
Besides, to pay pay heed to what the the words say say isis par
par-
ticularly
ticularly difficult
difficult for us moderns, because we find
moderns, because find itit hard
hard
to detach ourselves from the "at first" of
**at first
11
of what is is common;
common;
and ifif we succeed for once, once, we relapse
relapse all all too
too easily.
easily.
FABT II
PAllT 131
151
And so,so, even this excursus on OB word and terms will hardly
prevent our taking
prevent question, "What is
taking the question, is called think-
ing?"
ing?" meaning
meaning "What is is it
it that the word 'thinking' calls
that the
by
"by name?,"
name?," at first first in a superficial sense. The attempt to to
superficial
give heed to what the verb "thi.nk"
give us,? will strike us
tells us
"think** tells us as
as
an empty,
empty, pointless
pointless dissection
dissection of of terms picked
picked at at random,
random,
whose significance
significance is is tied
tied to tangible subject
to no tangible subject matter.
There are reasons why why thisthis stubborn appearance
appearance will will not
not
fade,
fade, reasons to which we must give give attention
attention because
because they
deeply rooted and affect
are deeply affect every explication and discussion
every eicplication
of language.
language.
If
If we ask what the word "thinking" designates, we obvi
"thinking" designates, obvi-
ously
ously must go go back into
into the history
history of of the
the word "thinking."
"thinking."
In order to to reach the realm of speech speech from which the the words
"thought"
**thought" and "thinking"
"thinking" speak,speak, we must become involved involved
with the history
history of language.
language. That history history has been made
accessible
accessible byby the scientific
scientific study
study of of languages.
languages.
But attention to to what words tell tell us is is supposedly
supposedly the
decisive step
step and directive on that that way
way of of thinking
thinking which
is
is known by philosophy. And can philosophy
by the name philosophy. philosophy be
based on the explication
explication of terms, that is,
terms, that is, on historical
historical inin-
sights?
sights? That would seem even less less possible
possible than the attempt
attempt
to prove
prove the proposition
proposition "2 "2X2 =
X 2 = 4" by by an opinion
opinion poll
poll
which ascertains
ascertains that,
that, as
as far as observed, men do in
as can be observed, in-
deed always
always assert
assert that two times two equals equals four.
four.
Philosophy
Philosophy cannot be based on history history-neither
neither on the
science of history
history nor on any science. For every
any other science. every sci
sci-
ence rests
rests on presuppositions
presuppositions which can never be established
scientifically,
scientifically., though
though theythey can be demonstrated philosophi philosophi-
cally.
cally. All sciences
sciences are grounded
grounded in in philosophy,
philosophy, but not vice
versa.
According
According to to this
this reflection, philosophy is
reflection, philosophy is prevented
prevented
from securing
securing an alleged
alleged foundation for itself itself byby way
way of
an explanation
explanation of the the meaning
meaning of of words. Such explanations
explanations
rely upon
rely upon the history
language. They They proceed
proceed histori
histori-
cally.
cally. Knowledge
Knowledge of history,history, like all knowledge
like all knowledge of matters
132
152 WHAT
WHAT IS CALLED
CALLED THINKING?THINKING?
of fact,
fact, is
Is only conditionally certain, not not unconditionally.
AH such knowledge has this limitation, that its
All its statements
are valid only so so long as
as no new facts
facts become known which
compel thethe retraction ofof earlier statements.
statements. But philosophy
philosophy
is that supra-historical
is supra-historical knowledge which, ever
knowledge which, ever since
since Des
Des-
cartes,
cartes, claims unconditional
unconditional certainty for its
certainty for its tenets.
tenets.
This reflection, often
often advanced and seemingly
seemingly convinc-
convinc
ing,
ing, confounds various
various trains of thought
trains of thought and their
their various
various
levels.
levels. This lecture
lecture course
course need not untangle
untangle the confusion,
confusion,
since along
along its
its own way
way itit makes clear,
clear, though
though only
only in
in-
directly,
directly, the relation philosophy and the
relation between philosophy the sciences.
sciences.
Summary
Transition
It
It takes
takes us aa while to to accept
accept the multiplicity of
the multiplicity of meanings
meanings of of
the question
question "What is is called thinking?" The question
called thibaking?" question is is
fourfold.
fourfold. But it it stems from a oneness,
oneness, a a simplicity.
simplicity. Accord
Accord-
ingly, it
ingly, it does not break up up into aa chance multiplicity.
multiplicity. Sim Sim-
plicity
plicity introduces measure and structure, structure, and alsoalso initial
initial
power
power and endurance,
endurance, into the f four
our modes in in which the the
question
question maymay be asked.
asked. The decisive
decisive mode is is the
the fourth:
fourth:
what isis it
it that calls
calls on us to think?
think? The calling
calling makes us us
think what is is most thought-provoking. The call call endows us us
thought-provoking.
with thinking
thinking as as the dowry
dowry of our nature.
nature. Through
Through the call, call,
then,
then, man is is in a way
way already
already informed of of what the
the word
"thinking"
"thinking means. As soon as as we ask ask the question,
question, "What
1 '
of that call
call which callscalls on us to think?," we find
to think?," find ourselves
ourselves
directed
directed toward the question, "What does
question, '"What does the verb 'to
c
think'
to think'
tell We can no longer
teJl us?" We longer use the
the word at at random,
random, in in some
signification
signification picked
picked out of the air, air, around which we then then
build up
up a concept
concept uponupon which to to construct
construct aa theory
theory of of
thinking.
thinking. If we did, did, everything
everything would be abandoned to to
caprice. Hie call
caprice. The call to think determines what the the word "to "to
think"
think*' calls
calls for.
for. Yet the call
call which commends our nature nature
to
to thought,
thought, is is not a constraining force.
constraining force. The call call sets
sets our
our
nature free,
free, so decisively
decisively that only
only the
the calling
calling which callscalls
PART II
PAB.T II 155
on us
on us to
to think
think establishes
establishes the the free
free scope
scope ofof freedom in in which
free
free human nature may may abide.
abide. The originaryoriginary nature of of
freedom keeps
freedom keeps itself
itself concealed in the calling by which it
calling by It is
Is
given
given to mortal man to to think what is is most thought-pro-
Nought-pro
voking.
voking. Freedom,
Freedom, therefore,
therefore, is is never something merely
something merely
human, nor merely merely divine;
divine 9
still
still less
less is
is freedom the the mere
reflection of their belonging
belonging together.
together.
As soon as the call call calls
calls on us to to think,
think, itit has
has placed
placed at at
our call
call what it it calls
tMnMng. What is
calls for--thinking.
for is called
called forfor now
has
has aa name,
name, is is called thus and so. so. What is is that
that name which
names what is is called
called for?
for? Surely
Surely the the word "thinking."
"thinking."
However,
However, this
this word "thinking,"
"thinking," as
as it
it is sounded in
is in
speech,
speech, obviously
obviously belongs
belongs to particular language.
to one particular language.
Thinking, however,
Thinking, however, is
is a
a matter common to
to all
all mankind.
Now it
Now it is
is impossible
impossible to to glean
glean the nature nature of of thinking
thinking from
the mere signification
signification of one solitary solitary word in in one par par-
ticular language,
language, and then to offer the
to offer the result
result as as binding,
binding.
Surely
Surely not.not. The only only thing
thing we can glean glean that
that way way is is that
that
something
something remains doubtful here. here. However: the the same
doubt affects the common, common, human, logical thinking
human, logical thinking-pro- pro
vided that henceforth we make up up our minds no longer longer to to
ignore the fact
ignore fact that logic,
logic, all that belongs
all that belongs to logos, is
to logos, is also
also
only single word in
only aa single in the singular particular language
singular and particular language
of the Greeks-and
Greeks and not just just in in its
its sound structure.
structure.
What does this this word "thinking"
"thinking" say? say? Let us give give close
close
attention to
attention to what the words "thinking," "thinking," "thought"
"thought" have
to telL With these words something
to tell. something has entered entered language
language--
just of late,
not just late, but long
long ago.ago. But though though it it entered
entered lan lan-
guage, it
guage, it did not get get through.
through. It It has gone
gone backback into
into the
unspoken, so
unspoken, so that we cannot reach it it without some further further
effort. In any
effort. any event,
event, ifif we areare to to give
give due attention
attention to to what
what
has entered languagelanguage with the the words
words "thought"
"thought" and
"thinking," we must go
"thinking," go back into into the
the history
history of of language.
language.
One of the ways ways that lead lead there
there is is written
written history.
history. By By now
it is
it is a science,
science, in our case case the science
science of of philology.
philology.
However, attention
However, attention to to what
what the the words
words tell
tell isis here
here sup-
sup-
134
posed to be a way for for us to 10 enter into thought. "Science **Science

does not think,"
think/* we said in in an earlier lecture. Science does
not think in in the
the rense in in which thinkers think. Still, it it does
not at all follow that thinking need pay no attention to
at all to the
the
sciences. The statement "science does not not think'' is is not aa
license under which thinking is is free toto set
set itself up
up out of of the
the
blue, so to speak, simply by
so to by thinking something up. up.
Yet we have placed thinking close to to poesy, and at at aa
distance from science. Closeness, however, however, is is something
essentially different from the the vacuous leveling of of differ-
differ-
ences. The essential closeness of of poesy and thinkingthinking is is so
so
far
far from excluding
excluding their
their difference that, OB
difference that, on the
the contrary,
contrary, it it
establishes that difference
difference in abysmal manner. This is
in an abysmal is
something we modernsmodems have trouble understanding.

trouble understanding.
For us,
ns poesy
? poesy has
has long
long since been aa part
since been part of
of literature,
literature, and
thinking likewise.
likewise. We find find it fitting that
it fitting that poesy
poesy and its its
history
history are
are dealt
dealt with in in literary history. It
literary history. foolish
It would be foolish
to find
find fault
fault with thisthis situation,
situation, which has has reasons
reasons of long long
standing or even to
standing, 7
to attempt changing it
attempt changing night. And
it over night.
yet-Homer,
yet Homer Sappho,
? Sappho Pindar,
7
Sophocles, are
Pindar, Sophocles, are they
they litera
litera-
ture? No! But that that is
is the way they appear
way they appear to to us,
us, and the
only
only way,
way, even when we are engaged engaged in in demonstrating
demonstrating by by
means of literary
literary history
history that these works of
that these of poetry
poetry really
really
are not literature.
literature.
Literature
Literature is is what has been literally
literally written
written down
down, and
?
copied,
copied, with the the intent
intent that
that itit be available
available to to aa reading
reading
public.
public. In thatthat way,
way, literature
literature becomes the the object
object ofof widely
widely
diverging
diverging interests,
interests^ which in turn are
in turn are once more stimu stimu-
lated
lated by by means of of literature--through
literature literary criticism
through literary criticism
and promotion.
promotion. Now and then, then, an individual
individual may may find
find hishis
way
way out of of the literature
literature industry,
industry and find
?
find Mshis way
way reflec
reflec-
tively
tively and even edifyingly
edifyingly to to a poetic
poetic work
work; but that
j
that isis not
enough
enough to to secure
secure for
for poesy
poesy the freedom of of its
its natural
natural habihabi-
tat.
tat. Besides,
Besides, poesy
poesy must first itself determine and reach
first itself reach
that habitat.
habitat.
PART
PART II
II 155
The poesy
The poesy of of the
the Occident
Occident and and European
European literature are are
two radically
two radically different
different essential
essential forces
forces in in our
our history. Our Our
ideas of
ideas of the
the nature
nature andand significance
significance of of literature areare prob-
ably still
ably still totally
totally inadequate.
inadequate.
However, through
However, through literature,
literature, and and in in literature as as their
medium, poesy
medium, poesy and thought
thought and and science
science areare assimilated to- to
one another.
one another. If If thinking
thinking is is set
set over
over against
against science,
science, itit looks
by scientific
by scientific standards
standards as as ifif it
it were
were miscarried
miscarried poesy.
poesy. If,If,
on the
on the other
other hand,
hand, thinking
thinking knowingly
knowingly avoids avoids the
the vicinity
vicinity
of poesy
of poesy, it
?
it readily
readily appears
appears as as the
the super-science
super-science that would would
be more scientific
be scientific than all all the
the sciences
sciences put put together.
together.
But precisely
But precisely because
because thinking
thinking doesdoes notnot make poetry
poetry, but
7
is aa primal
is primal telling
telling and speaking
speaking of of language,
language, it it must stay
stay
close to
close to poesy.
poesy. And since since science
science doesdoes not
not think,
think, thinking
thinking
must in in its
its present
present situation
situation givegive to
to the
the sciences
sciences that
that search
search-
ing
ing attention
attention which they they are incapable of
are incapable of giving
giving to to them
them-
selves.
selves.
In
In saying
saying this,this, we have mentioned only only the lesser
lesser re-
re-
latedness
latedness of of thought
thought to sciences. The essential
to the sciences. essential related-
related-
ness
ness is is determined rather rather by by aa basic
basic trait of the modem
trait of modern era era
of
of which the the literature
literature we have referred referred to to also
also forms aa
part. It might be briefly
part. It might briefly described
described as as follows:
follows that which is,
:
is,
appears
appears today today predominantly
predominantly in in that object-materiality
object-materiality
which is is established
established and maintained in power power byby the scien-
scien
tific
tific objectification
objiectification of of all
all fields
fields and areas. This materiality
materiality
does
does not not stem from from aa separate
separate and peculiarpeculiar power-bid
power-bid on on
the
the part
part of of the
the sciences,
sciences, but from a fact fact in the nature of of
things
things that that we we moderns still still do not want to see. Three
propositions
propositions will will serve
serve to
to indicate
indicate it.it.
1.
1. Modern science science is is grounded
grounded in the nature of of tech-
tech
nology.
nology.
2.
2. The nature
The nature of of technology
technology is is itself
itself nothing
nothing technologi-
technologi
cal.
cal.
5. The
5. The nature
nature of of technology
technology is is not a merely human
a merely
fabrication
fabrication which,which, given
given an an appropriate
appropriate moral
moral con-
136
!5S WHAT CALLED THINKING?
WIIAT IS CALLED TIIINKING?
stitution, could be subduE-d by by superior human wis-

dom and judgment.
WE- do not not notice thE' thf scirntific-literary objectification of of
that which i!•, is, simply h£>caus£' we are arP. immersed in in it.
it. For
that same reason, the the rP.Iation of of thinking to to poesy and to to
science remains today utterly confused and in in essence con-
cealed, particularly since thinking itself is is least familiar
with thethe origin of of itsits own essential nature. It It would thus
be possible to to regard the the question "What"\Vhat is is called think-
ing?" merely as as aa well-chosen subject for for the
the educational
purposes of of aa lecture course. However, the the question "What"\Vhat
is
is called thinking?" is-if is If it
it is at all
is at all permissible to to put this
this
into words-a world-historical question. Usually, Usually, the the name
"world history"
history" signifies the the same thing as as universal
universal his-his-
tory. But in in our usage, the the word "world history"history" means the the
fatum that there w i.s world,
worldly and that man 25 is as
as its
its inhabitant.
inhabitant.
The world-historical
world-historical question,question^ "What is is it
it that
that calls
calls OB
on usus
?t
to think?" ? asks: That which really
:
really isis-in in what way way does
does itit
come to to touch the the man of of our
ant era?
Our explication of of the
the question
question has has unexpectedly
unexpectedly driven driven
MS to
us to consider the relation relation of thinking
thinking to science. We are
to science. are
prompted
prompted by by an obvious
obvious scruple,
scraple which can be briefly
7
briefly exex-
plained
plained as follows. The question
as follows. question "What
"'What is is called
called think
think-
ing?"
ing?" unexpectedly
unexpectedly assumes for for usus the
the mode we listed listed inin
the first
first place,
place, which asks: asks what is
: is it to which we give
it to give the
the
name "thinking"?
**
thinking**? As we pursue pursue it,it, we givegive attention
attention to to
what the word says. says. This leads leads us to to the
the history
history of of the
the
signification
signification of terms. The history history of of language,,
language, however,
however, is is
accessible
accessible only only byby historical investigation. And historical
historical investigation. historical
and philosophical
philosophical knowledge,.
knowledge, by by an ancient
ancient doctrine,
doctrine, areare
radically different
radically different from each each other.
other.
Our concern with what words tell tell us,
us, meanwhile,
meanwhile, would
secure solid
solid grounds
grounds for the ways of
the ways of thought.
thought. But can can
thinking,
thinking, the philosophical,
philosophical, supra-historical knowledge of
supra-Mstorical knowledge of
eternal truths,
truths, ever be grounded findings?
historical findings?
grounded on historical
FART
PART II 137
157
This objection,
objection^ which threatens our entire enterprise even
in its
its first
first steps-how
steps how will
will we get
get it
it out of
of the way? We
the way? \Ve do
not want at all all to get this
get this scruple of the
scruple out of the way.
way. Let us, us,
meanwhile,
meanwhile^ permit
permit it it to
to stand on the
the way
way on which it it comes
to meet us.
to us. For it it could be that this way
that this way is
is no longer
longer aa way.
way.
Anyway,
Anyway, it it might be considered advisable
might advisable not toto instigate a
long-winded
long-winded discussion
discussion of the relation
relation between philosophy
philosophy
and science,
science, until
until we have gone through at
gone through at least
least aa few steps
of the question
question "What is is called thinking?" And yet
called thinking?" yet that
question
question maymay even be such that it it will
will never allow us to to go
go
through,
through^ but instead requires that we settle
requires that settle down and live live
within it.
it.
LECTURE
LECTURE
III
III
·-·
'\Vhile
While trying
trying to attend to to what words can tell tell us,
us, we let let the
relation to
to philology
philology remain an open question. The findings
open question. findings
of philology
philology maymay in any case give
any case give us a clue on occasion. But
occasion.
this does not mean that the findings of philology,
findings of philology, taken in in
themselves as as the judgments
judgments of of a science,
science, must constitute
constitute
the foundations on which we proceed. proceed. Whatever philologyphilology
has to say
say must first
first be given
given to it
it historically
historically;9 it it must have
reached philology
philology by pre-scientific ways leading
pre-scientific ways leading up up toto the
history language. Not until a historyhistory is is already
already given,
given,
and only
only then,
then, can the data of that that history
history become the sub sub-
ject matter of written history,
ject history, and even then the data al al-
ways remain by their nature what they they are.
are. Here is is where
we take our clues.clues.
In order to perceive clue, we must first
perceive a clue, first be listening
listening
ahead into the sphere sphere from which the due clue comes. To re re-
ceive a clue is difficult, and rare
is difficult, rarer the more we know,
rare--rarer know,
and more difficult
difficult the more we merely
merely want to to know. But
clues also have forerunners,
clues directives we respond
forerunners, to whose directives respond
sooner and more easily, easily, because wewe ourselves
ourselves can can help
help pre
pre-
pare them part
pare part of the way.way.
What is is it
it that isis named with thethe words
words "think/*
"think," "think
"think-
ing," "thought"? Toward what sphere
ing," "thought"? sphere ofof the
the spoken
spoken wordword
they direct us? A
do they A thought
thought-where
where isis it,
it, where
where does does it
it go?
go?
Thought is in need of memory,
is in memory, thethe gathering
gathering of of thought.
thought.
138
138
PART
PART II
II 139
13
The Old
The Old English
English thencan,
thencan, to to think,
think, and tlumcian, to to thank.,
are closely
are closely related;
related; the the OldOld English
English noun for for thought is is
thane or
thane or thane
thonc--a thought, aa grateful
a thought, grateful thought, and the the
expression of
expression of such
such aa thought
thought;5 today
today it it survives
survives in in the
the plural
The "thane/
thanks. The
thanks. "thane," that
1
that which
which is is thought,
thought, the the thought,
implies the
implies the thanks.
thanks. But perhaps perhaps thesethese assonances between
thought and thanks
thought thanks are are superficial
superficial and and contrived.
contrived. In In any
any
case, they
case, still do not
they still not show what is is designated
designated by by the
the ward
word
"thinking.,
"thinking."
Is thinking
Is thinking aa givinggiving of thanks? What do
of thanks? thanks mean
do thanks
here? Or do
here? do thanks
thanks consist
consist in thinking? What does thinking
in thinking?
mean here?
here? Is Is memory
memory no more more than
than aa container
container for for the
the
thoughts of
thoughts of thinking^
thinking, or or does
does thinking
thinking itselfitself reside
reside in
memory? In asking
memory? asking these questions, we are
these questions, are moving
moving in in the
area of
area of those
those spoken
spoken words that that speak
speak to to us from the verb
"think." 77
"think. But let let us leave
leave open
open allall the
the relationships
relationships between
those words
those words-"thinking,"
"thinking," "thought/* "thought," "thanks" and
"memory"-and
"memory'* and address our question question now to to the history
history
of
of words.
words. It It gives
gives us a a direction, though the written account
direction, though
of
of that
that history
history is is still
still incomplete,
incomplete, and presumablypresumably wil will
always
always remain so. so.
We take
We take the clue speaking of those words the
clue that in the speaking the
decisively is the "thane." But
decisively and originally
originally telling
telling word is
this
this word doesdoes not mean the current meaning meaning still still left over
in
in our present
present usageusage of of the word "thought."
"thought." A A thought
thought
usually
usually means an idea,
idea a
?
a view or opinion,
opinion, a notion. The root
or
or originary
originary word says: says the gathered,
:
gathered, all-gathering
all-gathering think-think
ing
ing that
that recalls. Thinking, in
recalls. Thinking, in the sense
sense of that telling
telling root
root
word
word "thane,"
"thane," is is almost
almost closer
closer toto the origins
origins than that
thinking later and even
thinking of of the
the heart
heart which Pascal, Pascal, centuries later
then
then inin conscious
conscious opposition
opposition to to mathematical thinking,thinking^ at-at
tempted
tempted to to retrieve.
retrieve.
Compared
Compared with with the the root thought in the sense of
thane, thought
root thane,
logical-rational representations turns
logical-rational representations
turns out to be aa reduction
and
and an
an impoverishment the imagi-
impoverishment of of the
the word that beggarbeggar the imagi
nation.
nation. Academic
Academic philosophy the
philosophy has has done
done its share to stunt the
its share to stunt
!40
140 WHAT
WHAT IS THINKING?
IS CALLED THJNKING?
word-from which we may gather that conceptual defini-

tions of terms, while necessary for for technical and scientific
purposes, are by by themselves unfit to 10 assure, much less less ad-
vance, the soundness of language, as as they are generally
assumed to to do.
do*
But the word "the "fl thane" does not mean only what we
call aa man's disposition or or heart, and whose essential nature
we can hardly fathom. Both memory and thanks move and
have their being in in the thane. "Memory"
"Memory" initially did did not
at all
all mean the power to to recall. The word designates the
whole disposition in in the
the sense of of aa steadfast intimate
intimate con-
centration upon the things that essentially essentially speak to to us in
every thoughtful meditation. Originally, Originally, "memory"
"memory" means
as much as as devotion : a constant concentrated
: concentrated abiding
abiding with
something--not
something* not just just with something
something that that has
has passed,
passed, butbut
in the same way
in the way with what is present and with what may
is present may
come. What is is past,
past? present,
present and to
?
appears in
to come appears in the
the
oneness of its
its own present being.
being.
Inasmuch as memory-the concentration of
memory' the concentration of our disposi-
disposi
tion,
tion, devotion-does
devotion does not let
let go
go of
of that
that on which it con
it con-
centrates,
centrates, memory
memory is is imbued not Just just with thethe quality
quality of of
essential recall,
recal1, but equally
equally with the the quality
quality ofof an unrelin-
unrelin-
quishing and unrelenting
quishing unrelenting retention.
retention. Out of of the
the memory,
memory,
and within the memory,
memory, die the soul
soul then pourspours forth
forth its
its wealth
of images
of images-of visions envisioning
of visions envisioning the the soul
soul itself.
itself. Only
Only nownow,
?
widely and deeply

within the widely deeply conceived nature of of the
the
memory, the contrast
contrast emerges
emerges between oblivion oblivion and
and reten
reten-
tion, what the Romans call
tion, call rnemaria
memoria tenere. Retention by
tenere. Retention by
mem&ria refers as
memoria refers as much to to what is is past
past as
as to
to what is is present
present
and toto come. Retention is is mostly
mostly occupied
occupied withwith what
what is is past,
past,
because the past
because past has got got away
away and and in in aa way
way no no longer
longer
affords a lasting
affords lasting hold.
hold. Therefore,
Therefore, the the meaning
meaning of of retention
retention
is subsequently
is subsequently limited
limited to to what
what is is pasty
past, what
what memory
memory draws draws
up, recovers again
up, again and again.again. ButBut since
since this
this limited
limited refer
refer-
ence
ence originally
originally does not constitute
constitute the the sole
sole nature
nature of of mem
mem-
ory, the
ory? the need to give a name to
to give to the
the specific
specific retention
retention and and
PAET
PAll. T II 141
recovery
recovery of what is is past
gives rise to
past gives to the coinage: re-calling
:
memory-remembrance.
memory remembrance.
Hie originary
The originary word "thane" is is imbued with the the original
nature of memory:
memory the gathering
:
gathering of of the
the constant intention
of everything
everything that the heart holds holds in in present
present being,
being. Inten-
tion
tion here is is understood in this this sense:
sense; the inclination "-ith
which the inmost meditation of of the
the heart
heart turns
tums toward all all
that
that is
is in being-the
being the inclination
inclination that that isis not within itsits own
control
control and therefore also necessarily be first
also- need not necessarily first en
en-
acted
acted as
as such.
The "thane,"
"thane," beingbeing the memory
memory so so understood.,
understood, is is by
by the
same token also also what the word "thanks" designates. designates. In
giving
giving thanks,
thanks, the heart gives thought to
gives thought to what itit has and
what itit is.
is. The heart,
heart, thus giving thought and thus being
giving thought being
memory,
memory, givesgives itself
itself in thought
thought to to that
that to
to which it it is
is held.
held.
It
It thinks
thinks of of itself
itself asas beholden,
beholden, not in in the sense
sense of mere
submission,
submission, but beholden because its its devotion
devotion is is held in in
listening.
listening. Original
Original thanking
thanking is is the thanks owed for for being.
being.
That thanks alone gives gives rise
rise to thinking of the kind we
to thinking
know as as retribution and reward in the good good and bad sense,sense.
But thanking
thanking enacted by by itself, as payment
itself, as payment and repayment,
repayment,
remains too easily
easily bogged
bogged down in the sphere sphere of mere con con-
ventional recompense,
recompense, even mere business, business.
Our attempt
attempt to to indicate what the words "thiaking/* "thinking,"
"thought,"
"thought/' and "memory" "memory" say might serve to
say might to point
point at at
least
least vaguely
vaguely toward the realm of speech speech from whose un un-
spoken
spoken sphere
sphere those words initially speak. Those words
initially speak.
bring
bring toto light
light situations
situations whose essential
essential unity
unity of nature our
eyes
eyes can not yet yet pierce. thing remains obscure above
pierce. One thing
all else.
all We can reduce itit to the following
else. We following question
question: :
Does the characterization of thane, memory, and thanks

thane, memory,
-notnot merely
merely according
according to the words, words, but in substance
substance--
stem
stern from thinking,
thinking, or does thinking
thinking on the contrary
contrary re re-
ceive
ceive its
its essential
essential nature from the origmary thane as mem
originary theme mem-
ory
ory and thanking?
thanking?
142
141 WHAT CAI,1*2I> THINKING?
WHAT IS CALLED THINK. lNG?
It may be that the

It the question is is posed altogether inade-
quately, so so that nothing essential can be reached by by way of of
it.
it* Only this much is is clear: what the
; the words thane, thought,
memory, thanks designate is is incomparably richer in in essen-
tial
tial content than the the current signification that the the words
still have forfor us in common usage. We could rest satisfied
us in
with that observation. But not not only d0 do we now go go beyond
beyond
it;
it; the
the attention we have given to to what those words tell tell us
us
has in advance prepared us to to receive from their speaking
a directive which carries us us closer to the substance
to the substance expressed
in
in those words.
We shall accept the the directive
directive from the the words "thinking,"
"thinking/
7
.. thane," "memory,"
"thane," "memory/* and "thanks," "thanks," takentaken in in their
their origi-
origi-
nary
nary sense, and shall shall try
try to
to discuss freely what the
discuss freely the word
"thinking"
"thinking" tells tells us
us inin its
its richer language. Our discussion
richer language. discussion
will freer, not
will be freer, not byby being
being more unbounded,
unbounded, but but because
because
our vision
vision achieves
achieves an openopen vista into the
vista into the essential
essential situations
situations
we have mentioned,
mentioned, and gains gains from them the the possibility
possibility ofof
an appropriate
appropriate bond. Our more careful careful attention
attention toto what is is
named in in the
the word "thinking" brings us directly
"thinking" brings directly from the the
first
first question
question toto the decisive
decisive fourth.
fourth.
The "thane,"
"thanct" as as the original memory, is
original memory ?
is already
already per per-
vaded by by that
that thinking
thinking back which devotes devotes what it it thinks
thinks
to that which is
to is to
to be thought-it
thought it is is pervaded
pervaded by by thanks.
thanks.
When we give give thanks,
thanks we give
7
it for
give it something. We give
for something. give
thanks for something
something by by giving
giving thanks to to him whom we
have to to thank forfor it. things for which we owe thanks
it. The things for thanks
are not things
things we have from ourselves.ourselves. They They areare given
given to to
us.
us. We We receive
receive many
many gifts,
gifts, of many
many kinds.
kinds. But the the highest
highest
and really
really most lasting
lasting gift
gift given
given to to us
us isis always
always our essenessen-
tial nature 7 with which we are gifted in
tial ? gifted in such a a way
way that
that
we are what we are only only through
through it. it. That is is why
why we owe
thanks for this this endowment,
endowment, first first and unceasingly.
unceasingly.
But the thing
thing given
given to us, in the sense
to us, sense of of this
this dowry,
dowry, is is
th:inking.
thinking. As th:inking,
thinking, it it is
is pledged
pledged to to what is is there
there to to be
PARTT II
PAll 145
thought.
thought. And the thing thing that
that ofof itself
itself ever
ever and anon gives
food for thought
thought is is what is is the
the most thought-provoking. In In
it
it resides the real
real endowment of of our nature for for which we
owe thanks.
thanks.
How can we give give thanks for for this endowment,
endowment, the the gift of of
being
being able
able toto think
think what is is most thought-provoking, more
thought-provoking,
fittingly
fittingly than by giving thought
by giving thought to to the
the most thought-pro
thought-pro-
voking?
voking? The supreme
supreme thanks,
thanks, then,
then, would be be thinking?
thinking? And
the
the profoundest thanklessness, thoughtlessness?
profonndest thanklessoess, thoughtlessness? Real Real
thanks, then,
thanks, then, never consists
consists in thatthat we ourselves
ourselves come bear bear-
ing
ing gifts,
gifts, and merely
merely repay
repay giftgift with gift.gift. Pure thanks is is
rather that we simply simply think-think
think think what is is really
really and
solely
solely given,
given, what is is there
there toto be thought*
thought.
All thanking
thanking belongs
belongs first
first and last
last inin the
the essential
essential realm
realm
of thinking.
thinking. But thinking
thinking devotes
devotes its its thought
thought to to what is is to
to
be thought, that which in
thought, to that in itself,
itself, ofof its
its own accord,
accord, wants
to
to be thought
thought about and thus innately demands that
thus innately that we
think back to to it.
it. When we think what is is most thought-
thought-
provoking
provoking we think properly.properly. When we, we, inin thinking,
thinking, are are
gathered
gathered and concentrated on the the most thought-provoking,
thought-provoking,
then we dwell where all all recalling thought is
recalling thought is gathered.gathered.
The gathering
gathering of thinkingthinking back into into what must be
thought
thought isis what we callcall the memory.
memory.
We do not understand this
We this word any longer in
any longer its com
in its com-
mon meaning.
meaning. Instead,
Instead, we are followingfollowing the the directive
directive of of
the ancient word. And we take it by no means only
it by only inin the
the
sense of written
sense history. We are
written history. heeding what is
are heeding is called
called byby
name in it,it, and what is is unspoken in
unspoken in it, it, and atat the
the same time
are keeping
keeping in in view allall that has meanwhile been said said about
thinking
thinking as as thanks and as as memory
memory and thinkingthinking back,back.
Summary
Transition
What isis called thinking? This time we shaQ
catted thinking? shall take
take the ques-
pte$r-
tion in
tion in the
the sense
sense listed
listed first,
first, and ask
ask : What does
does
: the word
"thinking" say? Where there is is thinking, there areare

thoughts. By
By thoughts we understand opinions, ideas, re-
re-
flections, propositions, notions. But the the Old English word
"thane" says more than that-more not not only in in terms of of
the usual meaning mentioned here, but but something differ- differ-
ent; and different not not only by by comparison with what went
before, but different in in nature, in in that it it is
is decidedly dis dis-
tinct
tinct and also decisive. The thane means man's inmost
mind, thedie heart, the the heart's core,
core that innermost essence of
?
of
man which reaches outward most fully fully and to to the
the outer-
outer-
most limits, and so so decisively that, rightly
decisively that, rightly considered,
considered, the the
idea of
of an inner and an outer world does
outer world does notnot arise.
arise.
When we listen listen to the word thane m
to the in its
its basic
basic meaning,
meaning,
we hear at at once
once thethe essence
essence of the two words : thinking
of the : thinking and
memory,
memory, thinking
thinkiBg and thanks, readily suggest
thanks, which readily suggest diem-
them-
selves in
in the
the verb
verb "to
"to think."
think/
7
The thane,
thmc the heart's
7 heart's core,
core, isis the
the gathering
gathering of of all
all that
that
concerns us, us, all
all that we care for, all that
f or all
7
that touches
touches us us insofar
insofar
as we are,
are, as
as human beings.
"beings. What touches us in in the
the sense
sense
that it
it defmes
defines and detennines
determines our nature,nature, what we care care for,
for,
we might
might call
call contiguous
contiguous or contact.
contact. For the the moment,
moment, the the
word maymay strike
strike us as as odd.
odd. But it it grows
grows out out ofof the
the subject
subject
matter it it expresses, and has long been spoken. It
expresses, long spoken. It is is only
only
that we fail
that fail too
too easily
easily to
to hear what is is spoken.
spoken.
Whenever we speak speak of subject object, there
subject and object, there isis in
in our
thoughts
thoughts a project
project and a base, oppositeness-there
base, an oppositeness there is is
always
always contact in in the widest sense.sense. ItIt is
is possible
possible that
that thethe
thing
thing which touches us and is is in touch with us us if
if we achieve
achieve
our humanity,
humanity, need not be represented
represented by by usus constantly
constantly and
specifically.
specifically. But even so so it
it is
is concentrated, gathered toward
concentrated, gathered toward
us beforehand. In a certaincertain manner, though not
manner, though not exclusively,
exclusively,
we ourselves
ourselves are are that
that gathering.
gathering.
The gathering
gathering of what is is next toto us here
here never
never means an
after-the-fact
after-the-fact collection
collection of of what basically
basically exists,
exists, but
but thethe
PART II
PART 145
tidings
tidings that
that overtake all all our doings, the the tidings of of what we
are committed to to beforehand by being human beings.
by
Only
Only because we are
are by
by nature gathered in in contiguity
can we remain concentrated
concentrated on what is is atat once present and
past
past and to to come. The word "memory" "memory" originally means
this
this incessant
incessant concentration
concentration on contiguity,
contiguity. la its original
In Its
telling
telling sense,
sense, memory
memory means as as much as as devotion. This This
word possesses
possesses the special
special tone of of the
the pious
pious and piety, piety, and
designates
designates the devotion
devotion of of prayer, only because it
prayer, only it denotes
the all-comprehensive
all-comprehensive relation relation of of concentration
concentration upon the the
holy
holy and the gracious.
gracious- The thane unfolds unfolds in in memory,
memory, which
persists
persists asas devotion.
devotion. Memory
Memory in in this
this originary
originary sense later later
loses its name to
loses its to a restricted denomination, which now
restricted denomination^
signifies
signifies no more than the capacity capacity to to retain
retain things
things that
that are
are
in
in the past.
the past.
But ifif we understand memory memory in in the
the light
light of of the
the old
old
word thane,
thane, the connection between memory memory and thanks thanks
will
will dawn on us at at once.
once. For in giving
giving thanks
thanks, the
?
the heart
heart in
in
thought recalls where it
thought recalls it remains gathered and concen-
gathered
trated,
trated because that is
?
is where it it belongs. This thinking that
belongs. thinking that
recalls
recalls in memory
memory is is the original thanks.
original thanks.
originary word thane allows
The originary allows us to to hear what the the
word "thinking"
"thinking" tells tells us.
us. This manner of hearing hearing cor cor-
responds
responds to to the essential
essential situation
situation which the the word thane
designates.
designates. This manner of hearing hearing is is the
the decisive
decisive one.
one.
Through
Through it, it we understand what "thinking"
? "tMnkiag" calls calls for
for, by
?
by
way
way ofof the thane.
thane. The current familiarfamiliar usage^
usage, by by contrast^
contrast,
leads
leads us to believe that
to believe that thinking
thinking doesdoes not stem from
thought,
thought, but that thoughts first
that thoughts arise out
first arise out ofof thinking.
thinking.
However,
However, we must listen listen still closely to
still more closely to the
the sphere
sphere
"
that
that appeals
appeals to to us inin the originary "thancy "mem
originary words "thane," "mem-
ory,"
ory/ "thanks." What gives
7
gives us food
food for
for thought
thought ever ever and
again
again isis the thought-provoking. We take
the most thought-provoking. take thethe gift
gift it
it
gives
gives by
by giving
giving thought
thought to to what is is most tiiought-provoking.
thought-provoking.
146
146 WHAT IS CALLED
WHAT IS THINKIN0?
CAtl*B THI:NltiNG?
In so, we keep thinking what is
ill doing so, we is most thought-pro-
voking. We recall it it in thought. Thus we recall in in thought
that to to which we owe thanks for for the endowment of our
nature-thinking. As we we give thought to to what is is most
thought-provoking, we we give thanks.

T0 the most thought-provoking, we devote our thinking
To
of what is Is to-be-thought. But this devoted thought is is not
something that we ourselves produce and bring along, fttaug? to to

repay gift with gift.
gift.
When we think what is is most thought-
thought-
provoking, we then give give thought to to what this most thought- thoûght-
provoking matter itself gives us to think about.
to think about. This thinking
thinking
which recalls, and which qua qua thinking
thinking alone is is true
thanks, does not need to to repay,
repay nor be deservedly
7
deserved, in in order to to
give thanks. Such thanks is is not a recompense;j but it
recompense it remains
an offering;
offering; and only only byby this offering do we allow that
this offering that
which properly
properly gives
gives food for thought
thought to to remain what it it is
is
in its
its essential
essential nature.
nature. Thus we give give thanks for for our thinkthink-
ing
ing in a sense that is is almost lost
lost toto our language,
language, and, and, so so
far as II can see,
see, isis retained onlyonly in in our Alemannic usage. usage.
When the transaction of a matter is is settled,
settled, or or disposed
disposed of, of,
we say
say in Alemannic dialect that it
dialect that it is
is "thanked." Disposing
Disposing
does not mean here sending
sending off,off, but the reverse
reverse: it :it means to to
bring the matter forth and leave it
bring it where it it belongs.
belongs. This
sort of disposing
disposing isis called thanking.
called thanking.
If thinking
If thinking could dispose
dispose of thatthat which ever ever and again again
gives food for thought,
gives thought, dispose
dispose it it into
into itsits own nature,
nature, such
thinking would be the highest
thinking highest thanks mortals can give. give.
thinking would be the thankful disposal
Such thinking disposal of of what is is
thought-provoking, into
most thought-provoking,, into its
its most integral
integral seclusion,
seclusion, a
thought-provoking is
seclusion where the most thought-provoking is invulner
invulner-
ably preserved
ably preserved inin its
its problematic
problematic being.being. Not Not one
one ofof usus here
here
would presume
presume toto claim that
that he is even remotely
is even remotely capable
capable of of
thinking, or even a prelude
such thinking, prelude to to it.
it. At thethe very most, we
very most,
shall succeed in preparing
shall preparing for for it.
it.
But
But assuming that some men
assuming that men will
will be be capable
capable of of itit some
some
PART II
PAl\T 147
day,
day, of thinking
thinking in the mode of such thankful disposal
then this thinking
thinking would at at once be concentrated in the
recall
recall which recalls
recalls what is
is forever most thought-provok-
thought-provok
ing.
ing. Then thinking
thinking would dwell within memory-memory
memory
understood in the sense of its
its originary
originary expression.
expression.
LECTURE
LECTURE
IV
l\femory
Memory initially
Initially signifies
signifies man's Inner
inner disposition^
disposition, and
devotion. But these words are used here in in the widest and
most essential sense.
sense. "Disposition,"
"Disposition/* man's heart heart,? has a
larger meaning
meaning than that given to it
given to it in modern
modem speech;
speech; it it
means not merely
merely the sensitive
sensitive and emotive side side of human
consciousness, but the essential being being of allall human nature.
In
In, Latin it
it is animus as distinct
is called animus, , distinct from anima*
anima.
In this distinction., anima means the fundamental de
this distinction, de-
terminant of every living being
every living including human beings.
being,? including beings.
Man can be conceived as as an organism^
organism, and has been so so
conceived for a longlong time. Man so so conceived is is then ranked
plants and animals,
with plants regardless of whether we assume
animals ? regardless
that rank order to to show an evolution, classify the genera
evolution or classify
7
genera
of organisms
organisms in some other way. way. Even when man is is marked
out asas the rational living
living being,
being, he isis still
still seen in in a way
way in
which his character as as an organism
organism remains decisive decisive--
though biological
though biological phenomena,
phenomena, in the sense of animal and
vegetable beings,
vegetable beings, may
may be subordinated to to that rational
rational and
personal character of man which determines his
personal his life
life of
of the
spirit. All anthropology
spirit. anthropology continues to to be dominated by by the
idea that man is is an organism.
organism. Philosophical
Philosophical anthropology
anthropology
as weU
well as scientific
scientific anthropology will not use man's essen
anthropology will essen-
tial nature as
tial as the starting
starting point
point for their
their definition
definition of of man.
If we are to think of man not as as an organism
organism but but a
148
148
PART
PAll. T II
II 149
14
human being,being, wewe must first give give attention to the the fact
fact that
man is being who has his
is that being who Ms being by by pointing to to what
is, and that
is, and that particular
particular beings manifest themselves as as such
by such pointing.
pointing. Yet that that which is, is does not
y
not complete and
exhaust itself
itself in what
what is is actual
actual and factual at at the
the given
moment. To To all
all that
that is-which
is which is to say,
is to say, toto all
al that con-
tinues to be determined by by Being there belongs just as as
much, and perhapsperhaps even more, more, what can be, be what must
7
be, and what is

be, past. Man is
z$ in the past. the being who is
is the is in
in that
points toward "Being,"
he points "Being/ and who can be himself only as
7
as
he always
always and everywhere
everywhere refers
refers himself to to what is. is.
In a way
way it it has never been possible to
possible to overlook
overlook altogether
altogether
this characteristic
characteristic of of human nature.nature. We shall soon see see
where and how philosophy
philosophy has found a place for
a place for this char-
char
acteristic
acteristic trait
trait in human nature.
nature. However,
However, it it still
still makes a
difference whether this

decisive difference trait of
this trait of thethe living
living being
being
"man" is is merely included in in our considerations
considerations as as aa distin
distin-
merely
guishing
guishing mark superadded
superadded to the living living being or whether
this relatedness to what is, is because it
7
it is
is the basic
basic character-
character
istic
istic of man's human nature, nature, is is given its
given its decisive
decisive role
role as as the
standard. And this this is
is not done where the the fundamental
determinant of man's human nature is is conceived
conceived as anima,7
as anima
nor where it it is
is conceived as animus . AnimuSj
as animus. .Animus, it it is
is true,
true,
means that inner strivingstriving of human nature which always always
is
is determined by, by, attuned to, to, what is. is. The LatinLatin word
animus can also also be translated
translated with the word "soul." "soul." "Soul"
"Soul"
this case
in this case means not the principle
principle of of life,
life, but that
that inin which
spirit has its
the spirit being, the spirit
its being, spirit ofof thethe spirit,
spirit, Master
"spark" of
Eckehart's "spark" of the soul. The soul
the soul. soul in in this
this sense
sense is is
what Morike speaks speaks of in his his poem
poem "Think it, it, my
my soul.**
soul."
Among contemporary
Among contemporary poets,poets, Georg
Georg Trakl
Trakl likeslikes to
to use
use the
the
word "soul" in in an exalted
exalted sense.
sense. The third third stanza
stanza of of his
his
poem "The Thunderstorm" begins begins : :
pain, thou flaming

"0 pain,
14
flaming vision
vision
great soul!"
of the great soul!"
150 WHAT
WHAT IS CALLED THIHKINC?
THINKING?
the Latin word animus intends is

'\Vhat the is designated more
fully in in the originary words "memory**
"memory'' and 4i"thane.'' thanc." Here
also isis lite
the juncture along our way where we set set out toto take
an even more essential step. That step leads to to the
the sphere
where tic the nature of of memory shows itself to to us
us in
in aa more
primal manner--not just in in terms of of the
the word,
word, but in in sub-
stance. We cto do not
not claim that the the nature of of memory,
memory, as as it
it
must now be be thought of, of, is
is named in in the
the initial, primal
primal
word. Rather, the the initial meaning of of the
the ancient word gives
us aa clue. The suggestions that follow
us follow up up this clue clue are
are no
more than aa groping attempt to to render the the ground
ground visible
visible
on which the the nature of of memory
memory rests.
rests. That attempt
attempt is is sup-
sup-
ported by by something which has appeared at
has appeared at the
the beginning
beginning
of thought, and has
of Western thought, has never
never quite
quite faded
faded from its its
horizon.
In
In what direction does does it
it point, thing we commented
the thing
pointy the
on asas the
the nature of of memory?
memory? Within the the radius
radius of of what thethe
originary word "memory""memory" designates,
designates, it it still
still looks
looks at
at first
first
as
as though memory,
memory, in the sense of of heart and disposition,
disposition,
were nothing more than aa part part ofof man's natural
natural equipment.
equipment.
Thus we take it it for something specifically human. And so so
something specifically
it
it is-but
is -but not exclusively,
exclusively nor eren
?
even primarily.
primarily.
We defined memory
We memory as as the gathering
gathering of of thinking
thinking thatthat
recalls.
recalls. As soon as as we give
give thought
thought to to this definition, we no
this definition,
longer it. We follow
longer stopstop with it it or
or before it. follow that that toto which
the definition
definition directs
directs us.
us. The gathering
gathering of of recalling thought
recalling thought
is
is not based on a human capacity, such as
capacity, the capacity
as the capacity to to
remember and retain. retain. All thinking
thinking that recalls what can be
that recalls be
recalled in thought
thought already
already lives
lives in
in that
that gathering
gathering which
beforehand has in its its keeping and keeps hidden all
keeping keeps all that
that
remains to to be thought.
thought.
The nature of that which keeps keeps safesafe and keeps keeps hidden
lies
lies in preserving, in
preserving, in conserving.
conserving. The "keep" "keep" originally
originally
means the custody,
custody, the
the guard.
guard.
Memory,
Memory, in the
the sense of human thinking
of thinking that that recalls,
recalls,
PAUT II
PAB.T 151
dwells where everything

everything that gives gives food for for thought is is kept
in safety.
safety. WeWe shall
shall call
call it
it the "keeping." It
the "keeping." It harbors and and
conceals what givesgives us food for for thought. "Keeping" alone
gives freely
freely what is is to-be-thought, what is
to-be-thought, is most thought-
provoking,
provoking, it it frees it it as a gift. But
gift.
But the
the keeping is is not
not
something
something that that isis apart from and outside of
apart of what Is is
most thought-provoking.
thought-provoking. The keeping keeping itself is is the
the most
thought-provoking
thought-provoking thing, thing itself is its
itself is
?
its modle
mode of of giving-giv- giv
ing
ing itself
itself which ever and always
always is
is food
food for
for thought. Mem-
ory,
ory, asas the human recall of what must be
recall be thought about,
consists in the "keeping"
"keeping" of what is is most thought-provok
thought-provok-
ing.
ing. Keeping
Keeping is is the fundamental nature nature andand essence of of
memory.
memory.
Our attempt
attempt to to explain
explain memory
memory as as no more than than aa caca-
pacity
pacity toto retain shows that that our ideas
ideas stop
stop too
too soon
soon and too too
restrictively with the
restrictively the immediate data. data. Memory
Memory is is not
not just
just
part
part of that capacity
capacity to to think within
within which it it takes
takes place;
place;
rather,
rather, all
all thinking, and every
thinking, appearance of
every appearance of what is is to-be
to-be-
thought,
thought, fmd find the openopen spaces
spaces in in which they they arrive
arrive and
meet,
nieet 7 only
only where the keeping keeping of of what is is most thought-
thought-
provoking
provoking takestakes place.
place. Man only inhabits the
only inhabits the keeping
keeping of of
what gives
gives him food for thought-he
thought he does does notnot create
create the
the
keeping.
keeping.
Only
Only thatthat which keeps keeps safely
safely can preserve preserve
what is is to-be-thought. The keeping preserves by giving
to-be-thought. keeping preserves by giving
harbor,
harbor, and also also protection
protection from danger. danger. And from what
does the keeping
keeping preserve
preserve what is to-be-thought? From
is to-be-thought?
oblivion.
oblivion. However,
However, the keeping
keeping is is not compelled
compelled to preserve
to preserve
in this manner. It
in this It can permit
permit thethe oblivion
oblivion of of what is is most
thought-provoking.
thought-provoking. What is is our evidence?
evidence? The evidence evidence is is
that what is is most thought-provoking,

thought-provoking^ what long long since
since and
forever
forever gives
gives us food for thought, remains in
for thought, its very
in its very origin
origin
withdrawn into oblivion.
oblivion.
The question
question then arises arises how we can have the the least
least
knowledge
knowledge of what is is most thought-provoking. More press-
thought-provoking. press-
152
152 WHAT
W H AT IS A L L ED TTHINKING?
IS CCABLED H I N 1t I N G ?
ing
ing stiU is is the
the qut'Stion : in; in what does the the essential nature of of
past being and forgetting con::.ist? ·we We areare inclined, because
we are
we are som accustomed, toto St>e see forgetting only as as aa failure to to
retain, and to to consider this failure a a defect. If If what is is most
thought-provoking remains forgotten, it II does not appear. It It

suffers an injury. At least, so so it
it seems.
In
la fact., thethe history of of \Vestem thought begins, not by by
thinking what is is most thought-provoking, but by letting
by
it
It remain forgotten. Western thought thus begins with an
perhaps even a failure. So it it seems, as as long as as we

regard oblivion only as as a a deficiency,
deficiency something negative.
? negative,
Besides, we do not get get on the right course
course here
here if
if we pass
ovf'r an essential distinction. beginning of
distinction. The beginning vVestem
of Western
thought is is not
not the
the same as as its
its origin.
origin- The beginning
beginning is, is ?
rather,
rather, the veil veil that conceals
conceals the the origin-indeed
origin indeed an unun
avoidable veil. veil. If
If that
that isis the
the situation,
situation, then then oblivion
oblivion showsshows
itself in
in a different
different light.
light. The origin
origin keeps
keeps itself
itself concealed
concealed
in the beginning.
begimmg.
Yet allall these anticipatory
anticipatory remarks which had to be made
to be made, 7
about the nature of memory memory and its its relation

relation to to the
the keeping
keeping
of
of what is is most thought-provoking,
thought-provoking, about the the keeping
keeping and
forgetfulness, about the beginning
forgetfulness, beginning and the the origin
origin-all all
these remarks sound
these solUld strange
strange to to us,
us, because
because we have only only
just come close
just close toto the
the things
things and situations
situations in in which what
we have said said finds
finds expression.
expression.
But now we need to to take only aa few more steps
take only steps along
along ourour
way, to
way 7 to become aware that that situations
situations are are expressed
expressed in in what
said which we find
was said find difficult
difficult ofof access
access for
for nono other
other reason
reason
their simplicity.
than their simplicity. At bottom,
bottom, aa specific
specific access
access is is not
not even
even
needed here here,? because what must be be thought
thought about about is is some
some-
how close
close toto us in in spite
spite ofof everything.
everything. It is just
It is just that
that itit is
is
still hidden from our
still hidden our sight
sight by
by those
those old-accustomed
old-accustomed pre pre-
conceptions which
conceptions which are are so
so stubborn
stubborn because
because theythey have
have their
their
own truth.
truth.
We
We tried
tried toto explain
explain the the question
question "What
"What is is called think-
called think-
PART II
PART 153
155
ing
ing?"?" inin respect
respect of of that
that mode of of asking it It which we had
listed in first
first place.
place. What does the the word "thinking" sig- sig
nify?
nify? It
It now speaks
speaks in the
the essential context which is
is evoked
by
by the words thane,
the thanc recalling
y recalling thought^ thanks, memory.
But the
the issues mentioned here do d0 not
not speak directly to to
us. They
They remain in what is is unspoken and almost forgotten.
The explanation
explanation of the first first question
question still presents itself to to
us
us as ifif it
it had merely reminded us
merely us ofof some old, forgotten
heirloom of of language.
language. But can we in in this way callcall the
the word
back into the spoken spoken language?
language? No! Then why do do we try try
at all
all to draw attention
attention to to what the the word states, since we
have to to concede that the treasures treasures of of language cannot be be
given
given artificial
artificial currency
currency in a usage usage somehow refurbished?
refurbished?
If that were what we hope hope and strivestrive for,
for 7 we would
have to take language,
language too,?too, for
for no more than an instrument
that can be manipulated
manipulated now one way way and now another. another.
But language
language is is not a tool.
tool. Language
Language is is not
not this
this and that,that, is
is
not also something
something else else besides itself.
itself. Language
Language is is language.
language.
Statements of this this kind have the the property
property that that they
they saysay
nothing
nothing and yet yet bind thinking
thinking to to its
its subject
subject matter with
supreme conclusiveness. The boundlessness with which such
supreme condusiveness.
sentences can be abused corresponds corresponds to the the infinity
infinity intointo
which they
they direct the task task of thinking.
thinking.
We
We concede: what is spoken in
is spoken in the
the word "thinking/*
"thinking,"
"thane" remains for for us
us in
in the
the realm of of the unspoken. When
the unspoken.
we hear talktalk of "thinking," we do
of "thinking/' do not
not only
only fail
fail toto think
think of of
what the word says says but do in in fact
fact form altogether
altogether different
different
ideas. The meaning
ideas. meaning of of this
this word "thinking"
"thinking" is is not
not deter
deter-
mined by by what is is spoken
spoken and unspoken
unspoken in in its speech. What
its speech.
"thinking" calls
the word "thinking" calls by by name
name is is detemnned
detennined by by a
different call. Hence we must ask
different call. once more "What is
ask once is called
called
thinking?"-and
thinking?" and in this sense:
in this sense: what
what hashas been
been understood
understood
since ancient
since ancient times
times by "thinking"?
by "thinking*'?
Instruction on what to
Instruction to understand
understand by by "thinking"
"thinking" is is
given by
given by logic.
logic. "Logic"
"Logic"-what what is that? How does
is that? does it get
it get
154
154 WHAT
WHAT IS CALLED TH1NEING?
IS CAIL&B THINltiNG?
that way, that it it decides what is is to

to bebe understood by by think-
ing? Is Is logic perchance itself the the calling that calls on on usus
to think? Or is
to is logic in
in tum subject to to the
the calling? \"\'hat is is
it that calls 0n
it on us
us to
to think?
The first
first question, "What
"\Vhat does the the word 'thinking' sig sig-
nify?," has
nify?/" has directed us us to the second, "'What have we
to the
understood since ancient times by by thethe word 'thinking'?"
*
?"
But the
the second question CUB can be raised only within the concon-
text of the decisive fourth. We
of the \Ve shall he be attending to to that
that
fourth question as as we now attempt to to deal with the the second,
second.
The second question runs; runs: what
what, according to
7
to the so so far
prevailing doctrine of of thinking, do we understand by by
.. thinking"?? Why
"thinking*
7
Why does this doctrine
does this doctrine have the the title
title "logic"?
"logic"?
Such questions bring bring us us into
into the realm of of what is is fa-
fa-
miliar, even most familiar.familiar. For thinking,
thinking, thisthis always
always rere-
mains the the real danger
danger zone,
zone 7 because the the familiar
familiar carries
carries an
air
air of harmlessness and ease, ease, which causes us to to pass
pass lightly
lightly
over what reallyreally deserves
deserves to to be questioned.
questioned.
Some people
people getget stirred
stirred up because, after
up because^ after the reference
in
in my
my inaugural
inaugural address "What is is Metaphysics?"
Metaphysics?" (1929) (1929), 7
II keep on raisingraising the question

question of logic. logic. Those who are are
here today
today cannot know, know, of course,
course ? that since my my lectures
lectures
"Logic,"
"Logic/ given
9
given in the summer of 1954, 1934 7 this title "Logic"

lids title "Logic"
conceals
conceals "the transformation of logic logic into the question
question of
the essential
essential nature of of language"-a
language
7'
a question
question that is is some-
some
thing
thing elseelse again
again than philosophy
philosophy of language.
language.
Those issues,
issues, then,
then, that we shall shall discuss in subsequent
subsequent
lectures,
lectures, cannot be urged
urged too strongly
strongly and too often upon
upon
our reflection.
reflection. Whether we shall shall letlet ourselves become inin
volved in in that
that reflection
reflection by by clearing
clearing its its path
path further,
further, each
man for for his
his part, or whether we shall
part, or shall pass
pass it
it over
orer asas some-
some
thing
thing presumably
presumably done done with
with:: that belongsbelongs to a decision
which only only the
the few
few cancan face.
face.
name "logic"
The name
The "logic" is is an abbreviation
abbreviation of the complete complete
title which, in
title which, in Greek,
Greek? runsruns bW"M}p.7J
e^wmjfiri A.O')'UC'J]-the
Xoywof the under-
PART
PAli.T II
II l55
155
standing that
standing that concerns
concerns the
the AcJyc^. AcJyf isis the
the noun to
to the
.XeyEw. Logic
verb Aey&i>.
verb Logic understands AE-yEW in
understands Xlyeip in the of AEyEIJ'
the sense of
n icara to say
Kani TWOS, to say something about something. The some-
thing about
thing about which
which aa statement
statement isis made isis in
in such aa case
lies beneath
what lies beneath it.
it. What lies beneath is
is called in
in Greek
in Latin
1moKE£JUVOv, in Latin subiectum.
subiectum. That
That about which thethe
AEyELJI states
states something
something is is the subject
subject of of the statement;
that which is
and that is stated
stated about
about it it is the predicate. The
is the The
l6yos-, as
Aoyos, XfyEw rt
as Xeycar TL itara
Kani was,
TWOS", isis the
the assertion of of something
something. The what-about
about something. what-about of of every
every statement is is
somehow given.given. It It touches
touches upon,
upon, is is contiguous
contiguous to to the state-
ment. It It is
is part
part ofof the
the contiguity
contiguity in in die
the widest
widest sense.
Logic, as
Logic, as the
the doctrine
doctrine of of the
the \&y$y considers
considers thinking to to
the assertion
be the
be assertion of of something
something about something.something. According
According
to logic,
to logic, such
such speech
speech is is the
the basic
basic characteristic
characteristic of of thinking.
thinking.
In order
In order forfor such speech
speech to possible in
to be possible in the
the first
first place,
place, the
something
something about about which somethingsomething is is said
said-the subject-
the subject
and that
that which is is said-the
said predicate--must
the predicate compatible
must be compatible
in
in speech.
speech. Incompatible
Incompatible things things cannot be made into a unit
by
by aa spoken
spoken statement: take, for example,
take, for "triangle" and
example, "triangle"
"laughter."
"laughter." The sentence sentence "The triangletriangle is is laughing"
laughing" can can-
not
not be said.
said. It
It can be said,said, of course,
course, in in the sense
sense that it it can
be pronounced so. But

be pronounced as as a a mere string
string of words;
words j we just
just did so.
it
it can not be saidsaid really,
really, in in terms of of what it it says. The things
says. 1be things
that
that are
are evoked by by "triangle"
"triangle" and "laughing"
"laughing" introduce
something
something contradictory
contradictory into into their relation. The terms do
make aa declaration,
declaration, but contradict
contradict each other. They thus
make the the proposition
proposition impossible.
impossible. To be possible,
possible, the propo-
propo
sition
sition must
must fromfrom thethe start
start avoid
avoid self-contradiction.
self-contradiction. This is
is
why
why the the law,
law, that
that contradiction
contradiction must be avoided, avoided, is is con-
con
sidered
sidered aa basic
basic tenet
tenet of of the
the proposition.
proposition. Only Only because think-
think
ing
ing is
is defined
defined as as Xoyos, as as an
an utterance,
utterance, can the statement
about
about contradiction
contradiction performperform its its role
role asas aa law of thought.
thought,
All
All this
this has
has long
long beenbeen known,
known, perhaps
perhaps too long,long, so that
we
we nono longer
longer allow
allow ourselves
ourselves to to give
give thought
thought to the defmi-defini-
156 WHAT
WHAT IS CAI*Em TTHIHEIHO?
IS CALLBD HI Nit ING?
tion of thinking as as X^yof To be sure, in

. in the
the course of the
history of Occidental-European thought it It was noted that
this thinking, born of of thethe XiJya? and shaped by by logic,

logic, does
not cover everything and does not suffice in in every respect.
We did come upon subjects and whole areas of
\Ve of subject mat-
subject mat
ter
ter that demand a different thinking process process in in order to to
become accessible to to mental perception. But insofar as as
thinking is is originally performed as as X<Jyw a change
? change of the
thinking process can consist only only in in a transformation
transformation of
the AOyO!>. Accordingly, the >..iyEw
Myo^. Accordingly, Xlyciy of the .Aayo!> Xoyos develops
develops
in to a 'SuiA.I.YEufJru..
StoXcyttr&u.
Logic
Logic becomes dialectic.
dialectic. For dialectic,
dialectic, aa Xoyo^ in the cus-
in the cus-
tomary form of of a proposition
proposition is is never unequivocal.
unequivocal. The
statement "God is is the
the Absolute" may may serveserve asas an example.
example.
The ambiguity
ambiguity that is is here possible
possible is is fforeshadowed
oreshadowed by by the
the
difference
difference in stress
stress with which a a statement of of this
this kind cancan
pronounced God is
be pronounced: : is thethe Absolute--or,
Absolute or, God is is the Abso-
the Abso
lute.
lute. The first first sentence means: God alone can claim the the
distinction of being Absolute, The second sentence
being the Absolute. sentence
means : only
:
only byby virtue absoluteness of
virtue of the absoluteness of the Absolute
Absolute
is God essentially
is essentially God. The statement "God is is the
the Abso
Abso-
lute" isis shown to several meanings.
to have several meanings. In appearance,
appearance, the the
sentence is is a simple proposition, a
simple proposition a Xoyosr AOyO!> in in the
the sense
sense dede-
fined.
This is is not yet
yet the place
place to to discuss
discuss whether the the ambiguity
ambiguity
this .A6yos-
of this X0y09 is is inherent in logic, logic, or or whether the the logicality
logicality
of the .Aayo!>,
Xoyo and thus the
?
the AOyO!> itself, has its
Xoyos itself, its grounds
grounds else else-
where. In any any event,
event, propositions
propositions such as as our "God is is the
the
Absolute" do not stay stay fixed when we say say them thought thought-
fully, that is,
fully, is, when we inquire inquire intointo what they they assert.
assert. Their
Xoyos says only what it
says only is meant to
it is say when it
to say it goes
goes through
through
its own Xcycw
its .AlyE£11 within and for for itself;
itself; through
through is 8u1;7 the
is Bid- the "for
"for
itself" is
itself" is expressed
expressed in Xeyecr&u,.AlyEufJru., thethe "middle voice" of of
.AlyEUJ. As 8taXeycr#at
Xeyeu>. 8ta'AeyEu0ru., the Xeyew
?
AEYE£11 or proposition
proposition proceeds
proceeds
back and forth for for itself
itself within its its own domain,domain, goes goes
PART
PAR.T II
II 157
15?
through it,
through it, and
and so
so covers
covers it
it to the end. Thought now is
to the is
dialectical.
dialectical.
We
vVereadily see
readily see that
that all
all dialectic
dialectic is
is by
by its
its nature logic,
whether it
whether it develops
develops as
as the
the dialectic of
of consciousness, ar
or as
as
Realdialektik and finally
Realdialektik finally dialectical
dialectical materialism. These,
too,? must always
too always be
be aa dialectic
dialectic of
of objects,
objects, which always
means objects
objects ofof consciousness,
consciousness, hence
hence consciousness of of self
(or one of
(or of its
its germinal
germinal forms)
forms). In
In dialectic,
.dialectic, too, thinking
is defined
is defined in
in terms
terms of
of the
the proposition,
proposition, the A.Oyos-. But
the Xoyog, But where
thought encounters
thought encounters things
things that
that can
can nono longer be be appre*-
appre-
hended byby logic,
logic, those
those things
things which
which are
are by
by nature inappre-
hensible still
hensible still are
are within
within the
the purview
purview ofof logic
logic--as a-logical,
as a-logical,
or no longer
or longer logical,
logical, or
or meta-logical
meta-logical (supra~logical)
(supra-logical). .

Summary Transition
We
We ask:
ask "What is
: is called thinking?" We
called thinking?" We askask the ques
ques-
tion in
tion in aa fourfold
fourfold way:way :
1.
1. WbaWhatt does the word "thinking" signify?
"thinking" signify?
2.
2. What does doctrine mean by
prevailing doctrine
does prevailing by thinking?
thinking?
5.
5. What is is needed for us to to accomplish
accomplish thinking
thinking with
essential
essential rightness?
lightness?
4.
4. What is is That which calls us into thinking?
calls us thinking?
These four questions,
questions, whose differences
differences we cannot rere
hearse
hearse too
too often,
often, are
are nonetheless
nonetheless one question.
question. Their unityunity
stems
stems from
from the the question
question listed
listed in the fourth place. place. The
fourth
fourth is is the
the decisive
decisive one--it
one it setssets the standard. For this
fourth
fourth question
question itself
itself asks
asks for the standard by by which our
nature,
nature, as as aa thinking
thinking nature,
nature, is to be measured. The third
is to third
manner
manner of of asking
asking is is closest
closest to
to the fourth. The fourth ques- ques
tion
tion inquires
inquires about That That which commands us to think, think, That
which
which entrusts
entrusts thinking
thinking to to us.
us. The third question
question inquires
inquires
about
about us, it asks us what resources we must
us, it asks us what resources
must rally
rally in in order
to be
to be capable
capable of of thinking.
thinking. TheThe third manner of asking asking the
the
question
question has has hardly
hardly beenbeen mentioned
mentioned so far, and that will
so far,
158
158 WHAT CALLED THIN It IN G
IS CALLED
WHAT IS ?
not change in what follows. Why? Why? The reason will will become
clearer ifif we now consider, in In aa short excursus, the the kind of of
answer that the question "\Vhat "What is is called thinking?" is
thinking?" is
trying to to find. \VeWe first see see it
it clearly in in the
the third question.
question.
It
It runs: what is is needed, what are the resources we must
have, to to be capable of of thinking with essential rightness? Tightness?

The third question is the
is the most difficult
difficult of
of all
ail to
to answer,
answer,
because here it it is
is least possible to to supply
supply the answer by
by
giving facts and stating propositions.propositions. Even if if we were to to
enumerate various things that that belong
belong to to essentially
essentially rightright
thinking, what is is decisive
decisive would still still remain undecided : to : to
wit,
wit, whether everything
everything that belongs to
that belongs thinking does
to thinking does in-
in-
deed belong to to us because
because we have already already listened
listened to to it.
it.
Such listening
listening is is always
always up up toto us alone.
alone. We must ourselves ourselves
discover the one and only only wayway to to answer the the question
question
"What is is called
called thinking?"
thinking?" in its third fonn.
its third form. If If we do not
not
find itit out,
out, all
all talk
talk and listening
listening is is in vain. And in
in vain. in that
that case
case
I1 would urgeurge you
you to bum your
to burn lecture notes,
your lecture notes, however pre pre-
cise
cise they
they may be--and
be and the sooner the the better.
better.
However, the way
However, way in which the third third version
version of of the
the
question is
question is answered throws light light upon
upon the the answering
answering of of the
the
other three, because they,
three, because they, including
including the the third
third question
question it it-
self,
self are one single
y single quE>stion
question in virtue of
in virtue of the
the fourth.
fourth. Perhaps
Perhaps
the question
question "What
*4
What is is called thinking?" is,
called thinking?" is, as.
as aa question,
question,
single and unique.
single unique. For us us this
this means that, that, when we ask ask: it,
it,
we stand at at the beginning
beginning of of a long
long road whose full full extent
extent
we can hardly
hardly envisage.
envisage. But our our stress
stress on the the uniqueness
uniqueness of of
this question
this question does does not mean that that we claim claim credit
credit for for the
the
discovery of
discovery of an important
important problem.
problem. Commonly,
Commonly, an inquiry inquiry
straight for
aims straight for the answer. It It rightly
rightly lookslooks for
for the
the answer
alone, and sees
alone, sees to
to it
it that
that the answer
answer is is obtained.
obtained. The answer answer
disposes of
disposes of the question.
question. By By the answer,
answer, we rid rid ourselves
ourselves
of the question.
of question.
The question,
question, "What is is called
called thinking?/*
thinking?," is is of
of aa differ
differ-
ent kind. When we ask,
ent kind. ask, "What
"What is is called
called bicycle
bicycle riding?"
riding?"
PART
PART II
II 159
159
we ask
ask for
for something
something everybody
everybody knows. If If there isis someone
who does
does not yet yet know what it it calls for,
for, we can
can teach him-
it Is
it is a well-known matter. Not so so with thinking. It It only
looks as
looks though we knew what the
as though the question really asks. The
question itself
question itself still
still remains unasked.
unasked. The question "What ""'nat
is
is called thinking?," therefore,
called thinking?/* therefore, does
does not
not aim to to establish an
answer by by which the the question can be
question can be disposed of of as
as quickly
and conclusively
conclusively as possible. possible. On the the contrary,
contrary, one one thing
and one thingthing onlyonly matters
matters with thisthis question
question: to
; to make the
the
question problematical.
question problematical.
Even that that is is aa long
long wayway off. Indeed it
off. Indeed it remains
remains question-
able whether we are
able are now underway
underway on that that way.
way. Perhaps
Perhaps
we modern men are still still not
not capable
capable ofof such thing. How
such aa thing. How-
ever, this
ever, this supposition
supposition means more than than merely
merely an admission
of our weakness.
of weakness.
Thinking-more
Thinking more precisely, the attempt
precisely, the attempt and the the duty
duty to
to
think-is
think is now approaching an era
approaching era when the high high demands
which traditional
traditional thinkingthinking believed it it was meeting,
meeting, and
pretended
pretended it it had to to meet, untenable. The way of
meet, become untenable. of the
question
called thinking?" lies even now in
thinking?" lies in the
shadow of of this
this weakness. The weakness can be described described in
in
four statements : :
1.
1. Thinking
Thinking does does not bring knowledge as
bring knowledge as do the sciences.
sciences.
2.
2. Thinking
Thinking does not produce usable practical
produce usable practical wisdom*
wisdom.
3.
5. Thinking
Thinking solves solves no cosmic riddles.
riddles.
4.
4. Thinking
Thinking does not endow us directly directly with the powerpower
to act.
to act.
As long
long as as we still
still subject thinking to
subject thinking to these
these four de*-
de-
mands,
mands, we shall shall overrate
overrate and overtax it. it. Both excesses
excesses pre-
pre
vent us from returningreturning to to a no longer
longer customary
customary modesty
modesty
and to persist in
to persist in it, amid the bustle
bustle of a civilization
it,
civilization that
clamors dailydaily for for a fresh
fresh supply
supply of latest novelties, and
latest novelties, Mid
daily
daily chases
chases after excitement. And yet
after excitement. yet the way
way of thinking,
thinking,
the way
way of of the question
question "What is thinking?," re
called tMnking?/*
is called re-
mains unavoidable as as we gogo into the coming
coming era. We can
era. We
260
160 WHAT
WHAT IS CALL ED THINKING?
IS CALLED THINK lNG?
have n0 no foreknowledge of of what that era era will hold, but but itit isis
possible to to give thought to to the
the signs thatthat signal its its deriva-
tion and its its advent.
Thinking is is the
the most precursory of of all
all precursory activiactivi-
ties of
ties of man in in this
this era,
era, when Europe's modern age age isis just
just
beginning to to spread over Hie the earth and be be consummated.
consummated.
Moreover, it it is not just aa surface matter of
is not of nomenclature
nomenclature
whether we we look OKI on the
the present age age asas the
the end
end ofof modem
modern
times, or or whether we discern that today today the the perhaps
perhaps pro- pro-
tracted process of of the
the consummation
consummation of of modem
modern timestimes is just
is just
starting.
The question "What "'What is is called
called thinking?"
thinking?" is is an attempt
attempt to to
reach that unavoidable
unavoidable way way which will will lead to the most
to the most
precursory step. Indeed, the question is
precursory step. Indeed, the question
is prior
prior even to to think
think-
ing, which is
ing,
is itself
itself the
the most precursory
precursory step.step. Thus it it appears
appears
to be
to be aa question
question of the kind
of the kind to to which modern philosophyphilosophy
liked to lay claim
to lay claim as as it
it went looking
looking forfor the most radicalradical
question-the 1
the question
question without presuppositions
presuppositions-which which
question
was toto lay
lay thethe unshakable foundations of the entire entire edifice
edifice
of
of the
the system
system of of philosophy
philosophy for aH all future ages.ages. But the the
question
question "What is is called thinking?" is
called thinking?" is not without presup-
presup
positions.
positions.
Far from it, it,
it
it isis going directly
going directly toward what
would here here be be called
called presupposition,
presupposition, and becomes
involved
in
in it.
it.
The
The decisive
decisive sensesense of of the
the question
question is is expressed
expressed when we
ask
ask "What
"What is is it
it that
that calls
calls onon us
us to
to think?" Which is is the
the call
call
that
that claims
claims man'sman's thinking?
thinking? This This question,
question, one might might say, say,
already
already presupposes
presupposes that that thinking
thinking is is by
by nature something
something
that
that isis called
called for, for, and
and isis maintained
maintained and, and, so so to speak,
to speak, rere
tained
tained within
within its its nature
nature only only by the call.
by the The question
call. The question
"What isis This
"What This thatthat calls
calls usus into
into thought?"
thought?" alreadyalready prepre
supposes
supposes that that thinking,
thinking, qua qua thinking
thinking alone,
alone, pays
pays heed
heed to to
the
the calling within it.
calling within it.
Thinking,
Thinking, then, then, is is here
here notnot taken
taken as as an
an occurrence
occurrence whosewhose
course
course is is open
open to to psychological observation. Nor
psychological observation. Nor isis thinking
thinking
PART
PART H
II 161
161
conceived merely
conceived merely as activity that obeys norms and a
as an activity
scale of values.
scale of values. ThinMng
Thinking cancan be
be guided by
by validity and
authority only
authority only if
if it in itself a calling, directing it
it has in it to
to
what there
there is
is to-be-thought.
to-be-thought. The question "What is This
...What is This
that calls
that calls on us
us to
to think?/*
think?," if
if asked with
with sufficient urgency,
brings us also
brings also toto the problem
problem that thinking, qua thinking,
that thinking,
is essentially
is essentially aa call.
call.
something is,
That something is, and that
that itit is
is such and such,
such, isis what
we usually
usually designate
designate as as a fact*
fact. "Fact"
"Fact" is is a beautiful and
beguiling word. Prevailing
beguiling Prevailing thought
thought has has long
long since formed
firm views on what it
firm it means. These views views have existed
from that
that moment on when a distinction, distinction, long
long inin prepara
prepara-
tion, came into
tion, view-the
into view the distinction
distinction between what some-
thing is, Tl.

thing is, ri Ecrrtv,
0ra>, and that that it on
it is,
is, Ecrrw. Later
on l(nw. Later terminology
terminology
distinguished
distinguished between essentia existentia, essence and
essentia and existentia^
existence.
existence. What we are to think of
are to of the
the explanation
explanation which
traditional
traditional thinking
thinking givesgives of the existence
existence ofof aa fact,
fact, is
is some
some-
thing
thing that can be decided only after we consider
only after consider that dis dis-
tinction
tinction by by which both existentia essentia first
existentia and essenfia first achieve
their
their determination. By authority, and on what
By what authority,
grounds,
grounds, is is that distinction made? How and in
that distinction in what way is is
thinking
thinking called
called to this this distinction?
distinction? The remainder of the
problematic
problematic nature of that distinction distinction allows us once again again
to
to fathom the implications
implications of the precursory precursory question
question
"What callscalls on us to to think?,"
think?," without involving
involving us prepre
maturely
maturely now in the the mystery,
mystery, and also fruitfulness,
fruitfulness, of the
question. is that we can always
question. The presumption
presumption is always ask thisthis
question
question onlyonly in in aa thinking
thinking way, way, and only only in that way can
pose
pose the
the question
question in in its
its befitting
befitting problematic.
problematic.
The course
course of of lectures
lectures has brought
brought us to the the second way
in
in which the the question
question needs
needs to to be developed.
developed. It runs:
runs what,
:
what,
in
in the
the soso far
far customary
customary and and long
long since implicit
implicit sense,
sense, do
we understand
understand by by thinking?
thinking? The implicitness betrays itself
implicitness betrays itself
in
in the
the fact
fact that
that what we we understand by by thinking
thinking is is pre-
pre
sented
sented and and handed
handed on on by doctrine bearing
by aa doctrine bearing the the title
title
162 WHAT
WHAT 1$ CALLED THINKING?
IS GAINED THINKING?
"logic."
**logic*" The doctrine of thinking bears that title right-
fully: for
: for thinking is the >..lyew of the
is the the XiJyc^.
This name here means to to affirm, toto predicate, something
of something: **The
of ; "The moon has risen."risen.,. To predicate does not
mean hE're primarily to to express in in speech, but to to present
something as as something, affirm something as as something.
something.
Such prest•ntation and affirmation is is ruled by by a conjunction
conjrmction
of what is
of is stated with that about which the statement is is
made. The conjunction Is is expressed In "as" and the
in the "as**
"about.''
"about." The conjunction constitutes constitutes a sentence.
sentence. Every
Every
proposition Is is aa sentence.
sentence. But not every every sentence is is a propo-
propo-
sition. "What is is called thinking?"
thinking?" is is not a proposition,
proposition,
though it it is
is aa sentence--to wit, a direct
to wit, direct question.
question.
Every proposition
Every proposition is is ipso
ipso facto sentence. But we need to
facto a sentence. to
give thought
thought to the question
to the question whether every every statement is is a
proposition-indeed,
proposition indeed, whether the statement can at at all
all be
defined in in terms of the sentence,
sentence, as grammarians be
as the grammarians be-
lieve.
lieve.
Is
Is the statement in the first first verse of Matthias Claudius'
Even Song, 4i
S^ngj "The The moon has risen," proposition, or even a
risen/' a proposition^
sentence? Of what nature is is this statement? I I do not know.
Nor do II trust myself to discuss the matter. To say
trust myself say that the
statement "The moon has risen" is is part
part of
of a poem,
poem, and thus
is
is poetry
poetry and not thought,thought,, does not help help us out of our pre pre-
dicament. The perfectly perfectly correct remark that Claudius'
statement is is a verse and not a sentence does not help help us
much,
much, so long long as it it remains obscure what it it means to to say
say
that the poetic
poetic statement gathersgathers into a poem. Presumably
poem. Presumably
properly think out what poetry
we shall never properly poetry is until we
is,7 rmtil
have reached far enough enough with our question: question: "What is is
called thinking?"
thinking?" Once more it it becomes apparent
apparent how
much of a precursor
precursor this this unique question is.
unique question is.
LECTURE
vV
·-·
When we ask our question
question "What is
is called
called thinking?** in
thinking?" in
the second manner,
the manner, it turns
it turns out that thinking is
that thinking' defined ia
is defined in
terms of
of the Xoyos. The basic
basic character
character of of thinking
thinking is is con
con-
stituted
stituted byby propositions.
propositions.
When we ask our question question "What is is called
called thinking?'*
thinking?"
in the first
first manner,
manner, then the word "thinking**
"thinking" directs
directs us to
the essential sphere
sphere of memory, devotion, and thanks*
memory, devotion, thanks. In
the two questions,
questions, thinking
thinking emerges different sources
emerges from different
of its
its essential nature. One might tempted to
might be tempted to explain
explain the
difference offhand in terms of linguistic linguistic designation.
designation.
Among
Among the Greeks,Greeks, the name for the basic basic form of think
think-
ing,
ing, the proposition,
proposition, is ourselves, the name
Among ourselves,
is Xoyos, Among
for the thing

thing that isis also
also concealed in the Xoyw A.6yos- happens
happens to
be "thinking." Linguistically, the word is
"thinking." Linguistically, is related to to
thought,
thought, memory,
memory, and thanks. But this this explanation
explanation exex
plains
plains nothing
nothing so so far,
far, assuming
assuming any explanation could be
any explanation
fruitful
fruitful here. The decisive questionquestion still
stiH remains this this: why
:
why
is it
is it that for Greek thinking,
thinking, hence Western and especially especially
European
European thinking
thinking (and
(and for us of today) today), thinking
,
thinking rere
ceives
ceives its
its essential
essential character to to this day from what in Greek
this day
is called
is called A.iyew
Xeyeo* and Xoyos? Just because at one time the callcall
ing
ing into thought place in terms of the Xoyosr, logistics
thought took place logistics
today
today is
is developing
developing into the global system
global system by by which all
all ideas
are organized.
organized.
163
163
164
164 WHAT
IS CALLED T HI N X. IN G ?
And why
And why does the
the determination
determination of
of the
the essence
essence of
of
thought not not take place in in terms
tenns of of those
those things
things that
that areare
evoked in in thethe sphere of of these
these wordswords thane, "memory,"
7
thane, "memory/
''thanks''-particularly
"thanks" particularly
since what what these
these words
words designate
designate
was in in Its
its essential profundity
profundity by by no means unknown
no means unknown to to
the Greets?
the Greeks? The differencesdifferences in in the
the essential
essential sources
sources of of
thinking to to which
which we have alluded alluded do do not,
not, then,
then, inhere
inhere in in
any way
any way in in the
the distinctive
distinctive linguistic
linguistic designations.
designations. Rather,
Rather,
the one
the one andand only
only thing
thing that
that is is decisive
decisive for for what
what even
even still
still
for us
for us constitutes
constitutes the the basic
basic character
character of of thinking
thinking-the the
AE')'EW of
Myear of the
the Aoyos,
Myo!>, the the proposition,
proposition, the the judgment
judgment-is that
is that
call by
call by which thinkingthinking has has been called, called, and is is still
still being
being
called, into its long-habituated nature.
called, into its long-habituated
nature.
When we raise raise the
the second question, what do we under
second question, under-
stand by
stand by thinking
thinking according
according to to the
the prevailing
prevailing doctrine,
doctrine, it it
looks at
looks at first
first as though we were merely
as though merely seeking
seeking historical
historical
information
information about about what view of of the nature of thinking
thinking had
come to to predominate
predominate and is is still in force.
still in force. But if if we ask the
second question qua
second question qua second question,
question, that is is, in the unitary
?
unitary
context
context of of the
the four
four modes of o which we spoke, spoke, we then ask
it
it ineluctably
ineluctably in in the sense
sense of the decisivedecisive fourth question.
question.
Then the the question
question runs:runs what is
: is the calling
calling that has directed
and is is still
still directing us into
directing into thinking
thinking in the sense of of the
predicative
predicative Aoyos?
This
This question
question is is no longer
longer historical-in
historical in the sense of
narrative
narrative history-though
history though it it is
is an historic
historic question.
question. But it it
is
is not
not historic
historic in in the
the sense
sense that it it represents
represents some occurrence
as
as aa chain
chain of of events
events in the course of which various things things
are
are brought
brought about-among
about among them this, this, that thinking
thinking after
the
the manner of of the A.6yos
Aoyos achieved validity validity and currency.
currency.
The question:
question "What
: "What call call has
has directed the mode of thinking thinking
to the >.kyew
to the Xlyo? of of the
the A.6yos?/'
Xoyos?/ is is an historic,
historic, perhaps
perhaps the
7
historic
historic question,
question, though
though in in the
the sense that it it determines our
destiny.
destiny. It It asks
asks what
what it it is
is that
that destines
destines our nature to to think
think
according
according to to the
the Xoyos, that that directs
directs it it there,
there, and
and there turns
turns
PART El
PAB.T II 165
it
it to use,
use, and thus implies many possible turns. Thus
Plato's
Plato's definition of the nature of of thought is is not
not identical
with that of Leibniz,
Leibniz, though it it is
is the
the same. They belong
together in that both reveal one basic nature, which appears
together
in different
in different ways.
ways*
But the fateful
fateful character
character of of being destined to to such think-
ing,
ing, and thus that destiny destiny itself,
itself, will never enter our hori-
zon
2son so long
long as as we conceive the historic from the
the historic the start only
as
as an occurrence,
occurrence, and occurrence as as aa causal chain of of events.
Nor will
will it it do toto divide
divide thethe occurrences
occurrence so so conceived into
those
those whose causalcausal chain is is transparent and comprehensible,
transparent
and others that remain incomprehensible
incomprehensible and opaque, what
we normally
normally call call "fate."
"fate." The call call asas destiny is is sa
so far
far from
being
being incomprehensible
incomprehensible and alien alien to to thinking, that on the the
contrary
contrary it it always
always is is precisely
precisely what roust must be thought, and
thus isis waiting for
waiting for a thinking
thinking that answers to
that answers to it.
it.
In order to to be equal
equal toto the question
question what,what, by by prevailing
doctrine,
doctrine, is "thinking/* we simply
called "thinking,"
is called simply have to to risk asking
the question.
question. This implies implies:: we must submit, submit, deliver
deliver our
our-
selves
selves specifically
specifically to the calling that calls
calling that calls on us to to think
after the manner of the >..6yos-.
after Xoyw. As long long asas we ourselves
ourselves do
not set
set out from where we are, that is,
are, that is, as
as long
long as as we do not
open
open ourselves to to the call
call and,
and, with this this question,
question, get get under
under-
way
way toward the call-justcall' just so long we shall
so long shall remain blind blind to
to
the mission and destiny destiny of our nature.nature. Yon You cannot talk talk of
of
colors
colors toto the blind.
blind. But a still greater ill than blindness
still greater ill blindness is is
delusion.
delusion. Delusion believes believes that it it sees,
sees, and that that itit sees
sees in
in
the only
only possible
possible manner,
manner, even while this its belief
this its belief robs
robs it
it of
of
sight.
sight,
The destiny
destiny of of our fateful-historic
fateful-historic Western nature shows
itself in the fact
itself fact that our sojourn
sojourn in this world rests
in this rests upon
upon
thinking,
thinking, even where this this sojourn
sojourn is is determined by by the
Christian
Christian faith-faith
f aith faith which cannotcannot be provedproved by by think
think-
ing,
ing, nor is is in
in need of of proof
proof because it it is
is faith.
faith.
But this, that we hardly
this7 that hardly discern destiny of
discern the destiny of our na-
166
166 WHAT
WHAT IIS CAL1*1
S CALL ED T H 1 N K IN G ?
ture, and therefore pay no heed to 10 the

the calling that has
called us to
to thinking according to to the AJyi>9, flows from still
another source. The influence of of that source is is not upup to
to us.
us.
But we areare not for
for that reason excused from admitting that
our understanding and explaining, our knowledge and our
intelligence--that our thinking still remains totally totally with-
out mission in in terms of of the destiny of its its own being.
being. The
more completely our thinking regards itself merely merely in in
terms of its
its own comparative written written history,
history and historical
7
historical
in this sense, the more decisively
decisively it it will
will petrify
petrify in in fateless-
fateless-
ness, and the less it it will
will arrive
arrive at the artless,
at the artless, fateful relation
fateful relation
to
to the calling by by which thinking
'thinking has been directed
directed to to the
the
basic character of of the X<Jyos*
Our age rages
rages in a mad, steadily growing
mad, steadily growing craving
craving to to con-
ceive history in in terms of of universal history, as
universal history, as an occurrence.
occurrence.
Its
Its frenzy
frenzy isis exacerbated and fed fed by by the
the quick
quick and easy easy
availability
availability of sources
sources and means of of presentation.
presentation. This This
sounds like
like an exaggeration,
exaggeration, but is is a fact
fact: the
: the unexpressed
unexpressed
archetype of the portrayal
archetype portrayal of all all and everything
everything in in terms
of universal history
history that is is palatable today is
palatable today is the
the illustrated
illustrated
weekly. Umveisal
weekly. Universal history,
history, operating
operating with the the most com com-
prehensive means, assumes that aa comparative
prehensive means, comparative portrayal
portrayal of of
the most varied
varied cultures,
cultures,, from ancient
ancient China to to the
the Aztecs,
Aztecs,
can establish
establish a relation
relation to history. This world history,
to world history. history,
however, is
however, is not the destiny
destiny of a world but rather rather the the object
object
established by
established by conceiving
conceiving world in tenns of
in terms of universal
universal his his-
tory, thus: the occurrence,
tory, thus: occurrence, to to be presented
presented from every every
angle, of
angle, every human achievement and failure
of every failure that
that cancan
any way
in any way be found out. out.
World history,
history, however,
however, is is the
the destiny
destiny whereby
whereby aa worldworld
lays claim to
lays us. We shall
to us. shall never
never hearhear that
that claim
claim of of the
the
world's destiny while we are engaged
world's destiny engaged on on world-historic
world-historic--
which in thisthis context
context always
always means
means universal-historical
universal-historical-
voyages. We
voyages. We shall
shall hear it only by
it only giving heed
by giving heed to to the
the simple
simple
calling of
calling of our
our essential
essential mission,
mission, so that we
so that we may may givegive itit
PART
PART II
IE 167
167
thought.
thought. The
The mostmost precursory
precursory attempt to to pay
pay attention to to
this way
way is is the question "What
the question "What does call on on IB
us to
to think?"
Note that
Note that we saysay: the
: the question.
question.
But even when we ask
But even ask what
what the
the call
call to
to think according
the Xoyos is
to the
to is-mustmust we not not even
even then
then g0go back to to the early
ages of
ages of Western thinking
thinking in in order
order to to comprehend what call call
directed this thinking
directed this thinking to to begin?
begin? This
This,? too
too, seems to
7
to be
be only
a narrative-historical
a narrative-historical and besides besides very
very risky
risky question. After
all, we know little
all,
little about the earlyearly thinking of of the
the Greeks,
that little
and that little only
only inin fragments
fragments,? and these fragments of of
disputed meaning.
disputed meaning. All All we havehave left
left ofof the
the works
works of of the
the
decisive early
decisive early thinkers
thinkers can be put put in
in aa pamphlet of of not more
than thirty
than pages. What does
thirty pages. does that
that amount to, to, compared
with the
with the long
long shelves
shelves ofof voluminous tomes with which the the
works of of later
later philosophers
philosophers keep keep us
us occupied?
occupied?
Inevitably it
Inevitably it begins to'
begins to look
look as
as though
though die the attempt
attempt to ask
to ask
the question
the question "\Vhat
"What is is called thinking?" in
called thinking?" the second man
in the man-
ner also
also amounts to to no more than a historical
historical consideration
consideration
of
of the beginnings
beginnings of Westem philosophy. We
Western philosophy. We shall
shall let
let it go
it go
at
at that,
that not because we are indifferent to
?
to that impression,
impression,
but
but because
because it it cannot be dispelled
dispelled byby talking
talking about it it instead
of
of setting
setting outout on the wayway of of our question.
question.
What is is that
that calling
calling which commends
our Western
thinking
thinking to to its
its own proper
proper beginnings,
beginnings y and from there still still
directs today's thinking

even today's
directs even thktking on its way? The thinkers of
its way? of
the
the fateful
fateful beginnings
beginnings of of Western thoughtthought did not, not, ofof
course,
course, raise
raise thethe question calling^ as we are trying
question of the calling, trying
to do now. What distinguishes
to distinguishes the beginning
beginning is is rather
rather that
that
those
those thinkers
thinkers experienced
experienced the claim of the calling calling by rere
sponding
sponding to to it
it in thought. But with such aa destiny,
in thought. destiny, must
they
they notnot also
also have comecome to to comprehend
comprehend explicitly
explicitly the call-catt
ing
ing that
that starts
starts their
their thinking
thinking on its its way?
way? We We maymay assume
so simply
so,? simply because
because any any thinking
thinking is is sent out on its its way onlyonly
when
when it it is
is addressed
addressed by by that
that which
which gives
gives food
food for
for thought
thought
as
as that
that which
which is to-be-thought. In
is to-be-thought. In this
this address,
address, however,
however, the
168 WHAT CAtf*E THINHING?
source of thP
the call
call itself appears, though not in in its
its full radi-
radi-
ance nor under the the same name. But before inquiring about
the calling that all
al Western and modem Euro-
pean thinking, we must try to listen to
try to to aoa
an early saying
which gives us evidence how much early early thought generally
responds to to a call, yetyet without naming it, it, or
or giving
giving it it
thought, asas such. Perhaps we need no more than to to recall
recall
this one testimony in in order to give the
to give fitting, that
the fitting, that is,
is, a
restrained answer to to that question of of the
the initial
initial calling,
calling.
The doctrine of of thinking is called logic
is called logic because
because tMniing
thinking
develops inin the Xfyw of
the A.iysv of the Aoyos. We are barely
the A.6yos. barely capable
capable
of
of comprehending that at at one time this this was not so, so, that
that a
calling became "needful" in order to
in order to set thinking on the
set thmking the
way
way ofof the
the }u)yos
Ai&yos into
into the Xlycw. A fragment
the 'Al:yEJ.J/. fragment of of Parmen-
ides,
idcs, which has been givengiven the number 6 6,? begins
begins with these
these
words : x_p;,
: ro A.lyew 'T'E
xpi) TO X^yer JJOE£v r*
TC 3*o?F
0
EOJI %ppwu."
T JOF usual
EPf£6'a.L." The usual
translation of the saying
of the saying is:
is "One should
: should both
both say
say and think
think
that
that Being is."
is."
Summary
Transition
The answer to to the question
called thinking?
thinking?" is, is,7'
of course,
course, a statement,
statement, but not a proposition
proposition that
that could
could be
formed
f orxned into a sentence with which the the question
question can be put put
aside as settled.
settled. The answer to the question
to the question is,
is, of
of course,
course, an
utterance,
utterance, but it it speaks
speaks from a correspondence. It
a correspondence. follows
It follows
the calling,
calling, and maintains the question
question in itsits problematic,
problematic.
When we follow the calling,calling, we do not freefree ourselves
ourselves ofof
what isis being asked.
being' asked*
The question settled, now or
question cannot be settled, ever. If
or ever. pro-
If we pro
ceed to the encounter of what is is here
here in question, the
in question, the call
call-
ing,
ing, the question
question becomes in fact only more problematical.
fact only problematical.
When we are questioning
questioning within this problematic, we are
this problematic, are
thinking.
thinking.
Thinking
Thinking itself
itself is
way. We respond
is a way. We respond to the way
to the way only by
only by
PAMT II
PART 169
lit
remaining
remaining underway.
underway. To be underway
underway on the the way in in order
to
to clear the way-that
way that is is one thing. The other thing is is 10
to
take a position
position somewhere along the the road
road,? and there make
conversation about whether, whether, and how, how, earlier and )ater
stretches
stretches of the way way maymay be different,
different, and in in their differ-
ence might
might even be incompatible--incompatible,
incompatible that is,
is, for
for
those who never walk the way, way nor ever
?
ever set
set out
out 0n
on it,
it, bat
but
merely
merely take up up a position
position outside it, there forever to
outside it, for-
to for
mulate ideas and make talk talk about the
the way.
way.
In order to to get
get underway,
underway, we do hare have toto set
set out.
out. This is is
meant in a double sense: sense for one tiling,
: thing, we have to to open
ourselves
ourselves to to the emerging
emerging prospect
prospect and direction of of the way
way
itself;
itself; and then,
then we must get
7 get on the
the way,
way, that
that is,
is, must take
the steps
steps by
by which alone the the way
way becomes a way. way.
The way thinking cannot be traced
way of thinking traced from somewhere
to somewhere like
to like a well-wom rut, nor does
well-worn rut, does itit at
at all
all exist asas
such in anyany place. Only when we walk it,
place. Only it, and in other
in no other
fashion,
fashion only,
? only, that is, is by
? by thoughtful questioning, are we on
thoughtful que$tionktg ?
the move on the way. way. This movement is is what allows

allows the the
way
way to to come forward. That the way way of thought
thought is is of this
nature is is part
part of the precursoriness
precursoriness of of tMnMng
thinking, and this
?
this
precursoriness
precursoriness in turn depends enigmatic solitude,
depends on an enigmatic solitude,
taking the word "solitude" in a high,
taking high, unsentimental sense. sense.
No thinker ever has entered into into another thinker's
thinker's solisoli-
tude. Yet it
tude. it is
is only
only from its its solitude
solitude that all thinking, in
all thinking, in a
hidden mode,
mode, speaks
speaks toto the thinking that comes after
thinking that after or that
went before. things which we conceive
before. The things conceive and assert
assert to be
the results
results of thinking,
thinking, are the inisunderstandings
misunderstandings to which
thinking
thinking ineluctably
ineluctably fallsfalls victim. Only they
victim. Only they achieve publi publi-
cation asas alleged
alleged thought,
thought, and occupyoccupy those who do not
think.
think.
To answer the question question "What is is called thinking?" is
called thinking?" is
itself
itself always
always to keepkeep asking,
asking, so as to
so as underway. This
to remain underway.
would seem easier easier than the intention to take aa firm
to take flrm posi
posi-
tion;
tion; for adventurer-like,
adventurer-like, we roam away away into
into the unknown.
1170
70 WHAT
lV H AT IS C A L L ED THINKING?
CALLED T Ill N K I :'l G ?
Nevertheless, if If we areare toto remain undt-rway we must first

of
of all
ill and constantly give attention to to the
the way. The move-
ment, step by by step, isis what is is essential here. Thinking dears
its
Its way only by its
by its own questioning advance. But this clear-
ing the way is
Ing of the is curious. The way that is is cleared does not
remain behind, but is is built into the next step, and is is pro-
pro-
jected forward from it. it.
Now itit always remains possible, of of course, and very very often
often
actually is is the
the case, that we dislike a a way
way of of this sort
sort from
the
the start, because we consider It it hopeless or or superflu0<u$
superfluous, or
7
or
because we consider it it foolishness. If If that is attitude, we
is our attitude,
should refrain from looking at at the way even from outside,
the way outside.
But perhaps it it is
is not
not fitting
fitting anyhow
anyhow to let let the
the way
way be seenseen
in
in public.
public. With this hint, hint, we shallshall break
break off off our general
general
remarks about
about ways
ways ofof thinking.
thinking.
We shall now try try to
to walk thethe way
way of of our
our question,
question, by by
asking itit in
in the
the sense of of the
the decisive fourth 7 but in
decisive fourth, the mode
in the
of the second manner.
The initially
initially proposed version of
proposed version of the second questionquestion
ran : what do we understand by
: thinking according
by thinking according to to tra
tra-
ditional
ditional doctrine,
doctrine, logic?
logic? At first it appears
first it appears thatthat the question
question
inquires historically what we have hitherto
inquires historically hitherto had in in mind
and taught thinking. But now we ask
taught about thir.king. ask::
"What is is the call

call to
to which Western-European
Western-European thinking thinking
is
is subject,
subject, the thinking
thinking whose roads roads we we,7 too, follow as
too, follow as soon
as
as we let
let ourselves
ourselves get get involved in in thinking?"
thinking?"
But even so, so, the impression unavoidably remains that
impression unavoidably that
the question
question amounts to to no more than a a historical
historical descrip
descrip-
tion of the beginnings
beginnings of Western philosophy. philosophy. The treat treat-
ment of of the question
question maymay retain this pecuMarity,
retain this peculiarity, thatthat it will
it wiU
remain forever implausible
implausible to the scholarly
to the scholarly research
research in the
in the
history
history of philosophy
philosophy and its principles of interpretation.
its principles of interpretation.
In the writings
writings of Pannenides,
Pamaenides? a a Greek thinker
thinker who lived lived
around the tum turn of the sixthsixth into
into thethe fifth
fifth century B.c., we
century B.C.,
read the saying:
saying :
FART II
PART 171
According
According to the usual translations,
translations, this
this means
means;:
"One should both say
say and think that
that Being
Being is . .,
is."
It would be most in keeping

It keeping with the way way on which we
have setset out with our question, if we were now to
question, if to leave
leave off
off
all
all asides and warnings,
warnings^ and tried
tried toto trace in thought what
trace in
the saying
saying tells
tells us.
us. But today,
today T when we know much too
much and form opinionsopinions much too too quickly,
quickly, when we com com-
.pute
pute and pigeonhole everything in
pigeonhole everything in a flash-today
flash today there
there is
is
no room at at all
all left
left for
for the hope
hope that the presentation
that the presentation of of aa
matter might
might in itself
itself be powerful
powerful enough
enough to set set in
in motion
any
any fellow-thinking
fellow-thinking which,which prompted
?prompted by by the
the showing
showing of of
the matter,
matter, would join way. We therefore
join us on our way. therefore need
these bothersome detours and crutches that otherwise run
crutches that
counter to to the style
style of thinking
thinking ways.
ways. This is is the necessity
the necessity
to
to which we bow when we now attempt, attempt, by
by circumscribing
circumscribing
the matter in ever narrower circles, to render possible
circles, to possible the
leap
leap into what the sayingsaying tells us:
teUs us :
"m ro ^CW TE
T0 AEyEw T voli.v
POZv T*
T. EOJI
OF Ep.p.£VCU."
One should both say

"One say and think that Being is."
that Being is."
LECTURE
LECTURE
VI
One isis tempted to to call

call this
this proposition
proposition an obvious platitude.
platitude.
What else can we say say and think of being, being, except
except that
that itit is?
is?
The statement is is not only
only self-evident-it
self-evident it remains totally
totally
vacuous. It It actually
actaaEy tellstells us nothing:
nothing : and what it
it does tell,
tell,
we knew before.
before. "Being
"Being is" is" sounds like rain rains.
like rain rains. Of
course rain rains*
rains. What else else could it it do? And a thinker of of
Parmenides'
Paitnenides' stature is is supposed
supposed to have uttereduttered vacuities
vacuities of of
this kind? Still
Still worse,
worse, he is is even supposed to
supposed to have offered offered
this vacuity
vacuity as something
something it is necessary
it is necessary to to say
say and think?
Let us just
just suppose
suppose that that Parmenides
Paimenides did utter utter the sen sen-
tence, "being
tence, "being is," is/ and did intend it
7
sense we men
it in the sense men-
tioned. Is it as
Is it vacuous, as
as vacuous, as easy
easy toto recite,
recite, as
as it
it would seem?
The phrase
phrase is is not so so vacuous as as to
to say
say the identical
identical thing
thing
twice with equal thoughtlessness. Even considered
equal thoughtlessness. considered super super-
ficially, the phrase
ficially, phrase proves
proves ambiguous.
ambiguous. It may say
It may say: being
being is,
: is,
meaning it
meaning it is
is not soso that being
being is not. What is
is not. is stated
stated is is the
the
actuality of being.
actuality being. But the phrasephrase maymay also
also say
say: part
part of
: of the
the
fundamental character of being being is is that
that "it
"it is"
is": Being.
: Being. The
"what" of being,,
being, its its essence,
essence, is is named
nruned inin the
the "is."
"is." Or,
Or, thethe
phrase may state
phrase state both things
things at at once the fact fact thai being
that being
is, and what it
is, it is,
is, its
its essential
essential nature.
nature. Parmenides,
Parmenides, it it is
is true,
true,
speaks neither of the "existence"
speaks "existence" nor of of the
the "essence"
"essence" of of
being.
being.
172
172
PART II
PA.l\.T 173
175
To keep
keep us from judgingjudging the phrasephrase too lightly, let let us try
us try
to
to clarify
clarify it it by an example. We admit that in
by example. in this
this case the the
procedure
procedure remains quite quite dubious.
dubious. There is is aa tree in in the
the
yard.
yard. WeWe state:
state the tree
: tree isis well-shaped. It
wel-shapedl It is is an apple tree.
TMs year
This year it it did not bear many apples. The birds like
many apples. it. The
like it.
apple-grower
apple-grower has still still other things to
things to ay say about it. it. The
scientific
scientific botanist,
botanist,, who conceives
conceives of of the
the tree as as aa plant,
plant, can
point
point out a variety
variety of things about the
things about the tree.
tree. And finally
there comes alongalong a strange
strange and curiouscurious human being and
says
says : the tree is,
:
is, it
it is
is not soso that the tree
that the tree isis not.
not.
Now,
Now, which is is easier
easier to say and to
to say to think-all all those
things
things that have been reported reported aboutabout thethe tree
tree from the the most
diverse quarters,
diverse quarters, or or the
the phrase:
phrase: "The free is!"? If
tree isS"? If we say say
this
this phrase
phrase and if, if in the saying, it
, saying, it is is aa Xeysr, aa thinking
and not justjust vapid
vapid talk-then,
talk then, II askask again
again : what about
: about thethe
tree
tree is
is easier
easier toto determine,
determine, its its lovely shape and all
lovely shape the other
all the other
things
things that can be perceived--or
perceived this, that
or this, that the
the tree
tree is?
is?
If we stop
If stop only
only for
for one moment to to say phrase: "The
say the phrase :
tree
tree is,"
is," saying
saying it it in terms of of what the the phrase says, we have
phrase says,
already
already said
said "is" about the tree. tree. And now we are are faced with
the question,
question, clumsy
clumsy but defmite:definite: what about this "is,"
this "is,"
according
according to to which it it is
is not so that the
so that the tree
tree isis not? Where
in the tree
tree or on the tree tree or behind the the tree,
tree, isis this
this thing
thing
named by by the "is"? We We say
say "is"
77
"is hundreds of times times daily,
daily, of
course. And even if
course. if we do not say say it,it, we constantly
constantly and
everywhere
everywhere refer refer with the auxiliary
auxiliary verb to that that which is. is.
But can this this fact alone, that we take
fact alone, take the "is" so so Iightly
lightly,.7
constitute any
constitute any kind of of evidence that that the word itself itself has no
gravity?
gravity? Who would have the temerity temerity to to deny
deny roundly
roundly
and on no particular
particular grounds
grounds that ultimately this
that ultimately this auxiliary
auxiliary
verb may
may even name the gravest gravest and most difficult difficult thing
thing
that
that remains to to be said?
said?
Let us for
for the
the moment strike strike outout the
the "is,"
"is," and the phrase phrase
"the tree
tree is."
is." Let us us assume it it had not yet yet been said.said. And
let us try
now let try to
to say:
say the tree
: tree isis well-shaped
well-shaped; the tree
$
tree isis an
174
174 W AT
WIIAT
II CALLED THINKING?
IS CALIfD THINKING?
apple tree; the the tree does not not yield many apples. "Without
the ..
the is" in
"is" in the
the phrase "the "the tree i% is,"
%f
these statements would
fall into aa void, taking along with them the
fall the whole science
of botany. Nor Is
of is that all.
alL Every human attitude to to some-
thing, every human stand in in this oror that sphere of of beings,
would rush away resistlessly into the the void if the "is"
if the "is" did
did not
speak. vVithout it, it,
human nature could not even rush away
into the
the void, because for for the
the "away"
**awaj" there must have been
a "here."
We note once more: the the fact that we take the the "is" too too
lightly Is is no proof that the the "is"
"is" and what it it names does not
keep within it it aa weightiness that we can hardly hardly ever
ever weigh.
weigh.
But that we can can take this "is" "is" so lightly shows how much
so lightly
we still areare inin thethe constant danger of
constant danger of illusion
illusion-an illusion
an illusion
all the
all the more deceptive
deceptive because
because it it does not appearappear even to to
exist.
exist.
Yet itit would be rash to to derogate
derogate the the appearance
appearance of of that
danger's non-existence
non-existence as as if it were something
if it something defective
defective
and baneful.
baneful. That appearance,appearance, and the apparent apparent indiffer-
indiffer-
ence ofof the
the "is"
"is" that goes goes with it, it, may
may hold the only only possi
possi-
bility
bility for
for mortal men to reach the the truth*
truth.
The phrase
phrase "being"being is"is" keeps an infinite
infinite distance from
empty
empty platitudes.
platitudes. On the contrary, contrary, it it holds the most com com-
pletely
pletely fulfilled
fulfilled secret
secret of all
all thinking,
thinking, in the first first intimation
of its
its statement.
statement.
And still
still the
the question
question remains open open whether the saying saying
of
of Parmenides demands no more than that
that we note the fact
that
that being
being is. is. This is is what we assumed at at first,
first, on the
strength
strength of of the familiar translation.
translation. But every every translation
translation
is already
is already an interpretation.
interpretation. Every Every interpretation
interpretation must first first
of all
all have entered into into what is is said, into the subject
said, into subject matter
it
it expresses.
expresses. Such entering entering is is in our case presumably not as
case presumably as
easy
easy asas entering
entering an orchard and there to to speak
speak of a tree.
tree. To
enter into
into what is said in the phrase
is said phrase "being
"being is" is" remains
uncommonly
uncommonly difficult difficult and troublesome for the the reason that
we are
are already
already within it. it.
PART II
PART 175
But before we enter intointo the saying

saying of
of Pannenides we
have quoted,
quoted, we must note that the
the saying
saying is
is not
not offered by
by
Parmenides as as the expression of a demand fm
expression of he makes.
Rather,
Rather, the saying
saying is
is addressed to
to Parmeaides
Parmenides himself. For
there
there soon follow the
the words:
words :
"-ref
*Va u·<r* eyru IJ.:vCJYya"
eyco fypaJêcrdat aiwya"
"This, xp*l ro
This, the x.JYT/ X.Eya.v and other things, II call
other things, call upon
upon you
you
*c
TO Xeyca^
to take to
to heart."
heart."
L" Who is this "I"?

is this It is
T*? It
C
is in
in any
any case being who
case aa being
calls,
calls, in any case a call
any case call which speaks
speaks toto the
the thinking
thinking thinker,
thinker,
and even speaks to him of ways.
speaks to It shows to
ways. It three ways
to him three ways: :
one which thinking

tMnking must go before all
go "before all other
other ways;
ways; one to
which thinlring
thinking must also also pay
pay heed as as it
it proceeds;
proceeds; and one
which remains impassable
impassable to thinking. The calling
to thinking. calling calls
calls
thinking
thinking toto the crossroads
crossroads of of way, way, and wrong
way, no way, wrong way.way.
But the way
way of thinking
thinking is is of such a kind that that this
this cross
cross-
roads can never be crossedcrossed by once-for-all
by a once-f decision and
or-all decision
choice of way,
way, and the way way can never be he put
put behind as as
once-for-all behind us. us. The crossroads accompanies us on
crossroads accompanies
the way,
way, every
every moment. Where does does this
this strange
strange triple
triple way
way
lead? Where else else but into
into what is is always
always problematical,
problematical,
always
always worthy
worthy of questioning?
questioning?
By
By the words of
of Parmenides it it can be shown that that he isis
subject
subject to
to a call,
call, that he recounts what is is addressed to to Mm
him
in
in order to
to respond
respond to it.
it. But we prefer
prefer to to give
give our attention
attention
directly
directly to
to what is is recounted here,
here, and in and through through it it
raise the question
raise the question what it it is
is that is
is addressed to him, him, rather
than prove
prove from the outside,outside, and at at lengthy
length, and fundafunda-
mentally
mentally in in vain,
vain, that
that what speaks
speaks here is is something
something likelike
a calling.
calling.
Let us listen
listen to
to the thinker's words
words: :
But how are

are we to hear without translating,
translating, translate
without interpreting? if we were dealing
interpreting? Even if dealing with some-
176 WHAT
WHAT IS C ALL Jt D THINKING?
T HI N X IN G ?
thing a thinker said In in our native language, It it would have

to be interpreted. We give attention to
to the saying while we
to the
an
are underway on the the way of of the
tl1e question "'\Vhat calls on us
to think?," in
to the sen5e of
in the l">f the
the whose laws and nature
aw
are ex:pres.•:;ed In in logic. ButBut then, would we not not be forcing
Parmenides' saying from the the start into a a specific perspec-
tive that is is solely determined by by the
the prospect opened up up byby
the way of
the our question? That is
of our is indeed the the case. But it it is
is
not aa dt-fect which we admit only only under stress. At most most, we
?
here encounter the the same difficulty with which every every inter-
inter-
pretation has io to struggle.
But it
But it becomes necessary here to to point out
out an illusion
illusion to
which we all all too
too easily
easily fall victim again and again.
victim again again. ItIt is
is
that we imagine we are are approaching Parmenides' saying
approaching Parxnenides' saying
in
in an objective manner and without without presuppositions
presuppositions when
we take cognizance of of it
it without any any intimations
intimations and even
without giving
giving it it thought.
thought. We We take
take cognizance
cognizance of it, we
of it,
add it to' the knowledge which we imagine we possess
it to possess any
any-
knowledge imagine
way
way of such matters.
matters* But this this "cognizance-taking"
"cognizance-taking" without
intimations and questions,
questions, and seemingly
seemingly not burdened
with any
any prejudice,
prejudice, is is in
in fact interpretation as
fact an interpretation as charged
charged
with presuppositions
presuppositions and prejudices prejudices as as is possible in this
is possible this
case. It
case. It rests
rests on the stubborn and widespread widespread priorprior assump
assump-
tion
tion that one can enter enter into dialogue with a thinker
into dialogue thinker by by
addressing
addressing him out of thoughtlessness. And here thought
of thoughtlessness. thought-
lessness
lessness is is to
to hebe found
found not so so much where someone un un-
trained in philosophy
philosophy asks asks his
his questions,
questions, but rather where
every
every seemingly
seemingly pertinent
pertinent and apposite
apposite citation
dilation from all all of
the world's philosophical

philosophical literature
literature is indiscriminately
is indiscriminately
thrown in. in.
But in what way way are we to to translate

translate the saying? Only
the saying? Only
one way
way is is open.
open. Without regard regard to to later
later philosophy
philosophy and
its
its achievements in interpreting this thinker, we shall
interpreting this thinker, shall try
try
to listen to
to listen to the saying,
saying, so so toto speak,
speak, in in the
the first
first bloom of of the
the
words. We We must be guided, guided, of course,
course, byby a certain
certain famil-
famil-
PAET
PART II
II 117
IJ7
iarity
iarity '\•.rith all
with all that
that has
has come down toto as
us of
of Parmenides·
sayings. This will
sayings. in the
will remain in the backgroWld of
of the
the discus-
sion to
sion to follow.
follow.
But we shall
shall keep
keep the
the current
current translation in
in view, for
for the
the
sake of
sake of contrast
contrast with the
the translation that we
we shall now at at-
tempt, and not
tempt, not in the conviction that we have thus fully
the conviction
confronted prevailing
confronted Pannenides interpretations. A full
prevailing Parmenides
confrontation could
confrontation could not
not be satisfied
satisfied with weighing the
the re
re-
sults of
sults of the various
the various interpretations
interpretations against each other. That
would mean to to neglect
neglect the
the main issue.
issue. Full
Full confrontation
consists in
consists the critical
in the critical analysis of the
analysis of the unspoken assumptions
of
of prevailing
prevailing Parmenides interrelations,
interpretations, for for which this is is
not the
not the occasion.
occasion.
Every confrontation
Every confrontation of different interpretations of
of two different of
a work,
a work, not onlyonly in philosophy, is
in philosophy, is in reality a mutual reflec
in reality reflec-
tion on the
tion the guiding
guiding presuppositions;
presuppositions it $
it is the discussion of
is the of
these
these presuppositions-a
presuppositions a task which, strangely,
task which, strangely, is is always
always
tolerated only marginally
tolerated only marginally and covered up up with empty
empty gen-
eralities.
eralities. In noting
noting this
this fact,
fact, let us also
let us also point
point out once more
that the
that the attempt
attempt at at translation proposed-it
translation here proposed too, and it
it too, it
most ofof all-is
all is possible
possible only
only on the way way on which we are
already
already engaged
engaged when we ask the question question : "What calls
: calls on
OQ
us
us to
to think?" With this, this, the prior assumption of our inter-
prior assumption inter
pretation
pretation is is both identified
identified and submitted for for discussion.
discussion.
But it
it would violate
violate the meaning
meaning of of interpretation
interpretation gen-gen
erally
erally if
if we cherished
cherished the view that there can be an inter- inter
pretation
pretation which is is non-relative,
non-relative, that is, is, absolutely
absolutely valid.
valid.
Absolutely
Absolutely valid
valid can at at the
the very
very most he be only
only the sphere
sphere ofof
ideas
ideas within which we beforehand place place the text to be
interpreted.
interpreted. And the the validity
validity ofof the presupposed
presupposed sphere
sphere of
ideas
ideas can be absolute
absolute only
only ifif the absoluteness rests some
rests on some-
thing
thing unconditional-on
unconditional on aa faith.
faith.
The unconditional
unconditional character
character of faith,
faith, and the prob- prob
lematic character of
lematic character of thinking,
thinking, are are two spheres
spheres separated
separated by by
an
an abyss.
abyss.
178 W H AT IS C ALL E. D THINKING?
T H I N ll t N G ?
Every interpretation is is a
a dialogue with the the work, and
with the saying. However, every dialogue becomes halting
and fntitless ifIf it
it confines itself obdurately to to nothing but
k directly said-rather than that the
what is the speakers in in the
the
dialogue involve each other in ia that realm and abode about
which they areare speaking, and lead each other 10 to it.
it. Such
involvement is is the
the soul of of dialogue. It It leads the
the speakers
into the
the unspoken. The term .. conversation" does, of of
course, express the
the fact that thethe speakers are turning to to one
another. Every conversation is of dialogue. But true
is aa kind of true
dialogue isis never a conversation. Conversation
Conversation consists in in
slithering along thethe edges of the the subject matter
matter, precisely
?
precisely
without getting involved
involved in the unspoken.
in the unspoken. Most textual
textual
interpretations-not only only of
of philosophical
philosophical textstexts-remain
remain at at
the
the level of
of a
a conversation,
conversatioiiy which may may often
often be
be rich
rich and
informative. And that,that, in
in many
many cases, is is enough.
enough.
In 0r case itit is
la our enough. We are
is not enough. are posing
posing aa question.
question.
We are asking for the unspoken
We unspoken call call that
that points
points toto the
beginnings of Western thinking, beginning whose
tht3aking 7 the beginning
course we,
we, too,
too today
7 today still follow in in our thinking^
thinking, though
though
Western is submerged in European
is for the moment submerged in think-
European think-
ing:
ing:
.. ro A.lyELVTE vo6v 'l EOV EJLJLEVO.l."
say and think that
"One should both say Being is."
that Being is."
Summary
ami Transition
Now we must translate
translate Parmenides' saying. What matters
saying. matters
here isis only
only the translation-we are still
translation -we are still far
far ffrom
rom aa formal
interpretation.
interpretation. But even the translation
translation must be careful :in
be careful in
respects. The first
two respects. first concerns the content of of the
the saying.
saying.
The second concerns the manner in which we cany carry it
it oyeot
over
from the Greek into
into our own language.
language,
1.
1 . The content ofof the saying.
saying. It all too
It all too easily
easily escapes us
escapes us
and slips
slips away
away into obviousness. It It hardly
hardly offers
offers enough
enough
PART
PART II
II 179
179
purchase to
purchase to our accustomed Ideas ideas toto detain us.
us. It
It offers us
us
food for
no food for thought.
thought. Why Why areare we in in danger
danger ofof being done
so quickly
so quickly with a sentencesentence such
such as as "being
"being is"?
is"? For
For one
thing,7 because when we hear the
thing sentence we
the sentence we fmd nothing
in it
in it worthy
worthy of thought. We
of thought. \Ve take
take the
the view
view that subject and
predicate of
predicate of the
the sentence
sentence are
are equally
equally clear
clear: being
: being-is is there
anyone who does
anyone does not know being? being? And "is" "is"-who who cares,
considering we already
considering already have our hands full full with what is, is,
also includes
which also includes after
after all
all everything
everything that
that has
has been and
is coming;
is coming; everything
everything that that isis no mo-re
more and is is not yet
yet and
thus is
thus is in
in some way way,? always. We
always. We have done with this "is,"T
this "is/
even before
before it is spoken*
it is spoken. And not only only we.
The danger
danger of of having
having done with things in
with things in this
this frivolous
frivolous
way has another and primary
way has reason: that
primary reason : in the
that in the course of
two and aa half
half thousand years, thinking itself
years, thinking itself has slowly
slowly
become accustomed to to the idea
idea which the the sentence
sentence states.
states.
Hence the theory
theory could arise
arise that nothing
nothing further
further could be
said
said about what the "is" "is" tells us. Kant himself counts the
tells us.
words "being"
"being" and "existence" among among the "almost un un-
analysable
analysable concepts."
concepts." He speaksspeaks about it it in a short, still
shoi% still
underestimated work which dates from 1763
underestimated (eighteen
1765 (eighteen
years
years before his his principal work. Critique
principal work, Critique of of Pure Reason)
and is entitled The Only
is entitled Only Possible Proof for
Possible Proof for a Demonstration
of
of the
the Existence
Existence ofof God (Der einzig moegliche
(Der einng Beweis-
moegliche Bewez$~
f
grund
grund zu einer
einer Demonstration des Daseins Gottes). Gottes} Kant
Kant'ss
.
judgment,
judgment, thatthat "being"
"being" belongs
belongs among
among the "almost unan- unan
alysable
alysable concepts,"
concepts," is is indeed fully justified once we share
fully justified
his
his assumption
assumption thatthat what the words "being" "being" and "exist-
"exist
ence" designate primarily and onlyonly in a
designate can be grasped
grasped primarily
in a
concept.
concept.
No
No wonder
wonder thenthen that we no longer
that we longer notice at all un
all the un-
heard-of
heard-of sense
sense ofof this "being is,"
this sentence "being is," much less
less are
touched
touched by by it
it to
to the
the point
point where our entire nature is so
is so
shaken that
that it wiU never again
it will again be the same.
same* Through the the
centuries
centuries this
this sentence,
sentence, inin many
many vagrant
vagrant variations and and inin
180
ISO WHAT CA&LED THINKING?
WHAT IS CALLED TlfiNKING?
many ways has, explicitly or tacitly, been and remained the the
h•ading theme of of thinking.
Today, wht>n talk about "being" "being" and "t-xistence'' is prac-
is prac-
tically a daily routine, we notice only the the monotony of of the
the
sentence "being is." is," At best, we are are offended by by the
the elusive-
ness of
of the
the apparent generality and abstraction it it expresses.
IndeE-d. the
the most emphatic reminder that what the the sentence
says in
In truth is is something altogether different, different, cancan for
for the
the
present have hardly any effect.
And yetyet thethe day may maj come when someone will will find
find thethe
sentence astonishing nonetheless, and will notice notice that
that all
all the
the
centuries that have passed away away have not not been able able to
to di di-
minish it-that
it unbeknownst to to us
us it
it has
has remained as as prob-
prob-
lematical as ever. This is
as ever. is why
why the the sentence
sentence still
still concerns
concerns us us
at this hour,
at honr as ?
as directly
directly as as it ever did
it ever did, with one difference
?
difference
only.
Formerly,
Formerly a radiance all
?
all its illumined what this
its own illumined this
senten(;e had to to say,
say ? so
so that its problematic vanished
its problematic vanished in in that
that
light. In consequence
consequence of a a strange darkening, which has
strange darkening, has
nothing to to- do with a decline and f fall of the
all of the West
West,7 that
that light
light
later fails
fails toto appear.
appear. What the sentence sentence sayssays turns
turns into
into thethe
u
obvious:
obvious: "being
"being is." is." What else else can beingbeing do than "be," be,"
once it
it is
is at
at all?
all? Today
Today we want to
to know only why being
only why being is. is.
And so we ask: ask by:by what is is being caused? Being, after
being Being, after all, all, isis
the actual,
actual^ and as as such made actual active, and is
actual and active,, is every
every-
where referred to to causes.
causes. And in in such
such fformulations
ormulations of of our
our
questions
questions we include as as obvious that that "being"
"being" means as as
much as "actuality."
"actuality*"
2. The translation
2. translation of of the saying. The sentence
tJm saying. sentence "being
"being
is" seems to to occur in in the translation.
translation. For this this reason
reason alone
alone
the translation must meet unusual conditions. conditions. Since
Since today's
today's
still follows directly in the
thinking still
thinking the footsteps
footsteps ofof this
this saying
directly saying
--even
even when it it imagines that it
imagines it need pay
pay no attention
attention to
to
it-the
it the translation
translation is is at
at no time purelypurely aa problem
problem of of the
the
historical
historical interpretation
interpretation of an ancient ancient texttext about
about which
which
PART II
PART 181
philologists disagree. In
philologists disagree. In the
the case
case here before us,
us, we shall
attempt
attempt the translation along
along the way
way of the one question: :
"What calls
calls on us to
to think?"
The translation isis of a special
special kind, the saying in
kind, because the in
translation
translation does more than conveyconvey knowledge
knowledge of of an earlier
earlier
view of philosophy.
philosophy. But at at the same time, the translation is
time, the is
nothing
nothing special,
special^ nothing
nothing worthy
worthy ofof distinction;
distinction; for
for it
it stays
within the problematic

problematic of of the question
question that guides
guides it.
it. The
explication saying remains within the mandate of

explication of the saying of
translation.
translation.
LECTURE
VII
·-·
saying becomes clearer
The saying if we take
clearer if take the liberty
liberty of insert-
insert-
ing three
three colons,
colons, to
to give
give a sharper articulation to
sharper articulation its word
to its
structure. We shall
structure. We shall also write the saying
also write saying in
in four separate
separate
lines:
Hues;
"m:
ro AEyav TE JIOEiv T.:
"'
EOJI:
lp.JUVw. ..,
Following
Following the usual translation,
translation^ fitted closely now to
fitted more closely
the Greek text,
text, the saying
saying then runs : :
''Needful
"Needful : the saying
:
saying also
also thinking too : being
thinking too being : to be."
: :
This arrangement
arrangement does not make the content of the saying saying
any
any clearer.
clearer. Nor is
is there any
any need for greater
greater clarity at
clarity
this
this time. Every
Every man endowed with understanding
understanding under-
under
stands what is is being
being saidsaid here. What we may under-
may not under
stand isis only
only this,
this, that such a a saying
saying should occur at allall in
the works of aa thinker. And right away we catch ourselves
right away
in the act of slipping past this
slipping past thing we cannot understand.
this thing
How would it it be ifif we took this to be astonished
this occasion to
that seemingly
seemingly so obvious a saying saying is pronounced with such
is pronounced
emphasis in a thinker's works? How would it

emphasis if we were
it be if
182
182
FART II
PAR.T 28:5
185
astonished
astonished about it, it, and letlet our astonishment make us us aware
that perhaps something
that perhaps something problematical,
problematical, something worthy of of
questioning,
questioning, is is involved here?
We fust
We just now stressed
stressed the structure
structure of of the
the saying, only in in
order to getget closer to to the area of its its problematic.
problematic. The colons
we inserted
inserted give
give a first,
first, outward sign of of the
the manner in in
which the words are put put inin order relative
relative toto one another.
The Greek word for order and placement placement is is TO^. In orar our
saying,
saying, the words follow upon each other
upon each other without connec-
tion.
tion. They
They are lined up up side by side,
side by side; "beside,"
"beside," or or more
exactly
exactly "by,"
"by," isis 7rap6.
wapd in in Greek. The word order order of of our say-
ing
ing isis paratactic
paratactic and not, not, as
as the usual
usual translation
translation represents
it:
it: "One should both say say . ...
. . that."
that." By
By this
this "both" and
"that,"
"that/* the words are put put inin aa specific order. The connec
specific order. connec-
tion
tion coordinates
coordinates them,
them, putsputs them together
together in in an order;
order; ia in
Greek,
Greek, "together" is aVv. "synthesis." The
"together" is aw. We speak speak ofof "synthesis,"
usual translation
usual translation of of the saying puts the
saying puts the words together
together in
an order
order,7 by
by inserting
inserting connecting
connecting words. In regard regard to to its
its
word order,
order, the translation is is syntactic.
syntactic.
Syntax
Syntax is is the study
study of of sentence structure
structure in the widest
sense.
sense. Our ideasideas of languages are formed
of the structure of languages
in
in terms of of syntax.
syntax. Where we encounter languages languages that
have no syntax,
syntax, we normally
normally understand their their structure to to
be aa deviation
deviation from,
from, or a failure to to attain,
attain, syntactic
syntactic struc-struc
ture.
ture. Paratactic
Paratactic structure
structure is especially in the lan
is found especially lan-
guages
guages of primitive peoples.
of primitive Paratactic speech
peoples. Paratactic speech occurs also also
in
in syntactically
syntactically structured
structured languages,
languages, for instance among
children.
children. Then everything
everything fits, fits, since children,
since children, too, too, areare
considered
considered primitive.
primitive. A A child might
might say say about a passing passing
dog: "Bow-wow, . ' X ' ' \ ' ,_
weiw r, or
dog: "Bow-wow, bad, bad, bite.'
bite." Xp^ fY11 TO
TO XeyeF re 'TE VOE£V T €OJ'
Iftfterat sounds that way.

EJLp.ePO.L way.
The fact
fact that
that an expression
expression of early early thanking
thinking speaks speaks
paratactically
paratacticaUy fits fits in splendidly with the common picture
in splendidly picture
we have of of those
those thinkers among whom Parmenides be
thinkers among be-
longs.
longs.
He isis counted
counted amongamong the the pre-Socratics
pre-Socratics or pre-Fta-
pre-Pla-
184
184 WHAT
W H AT IS C A L LED THINKING?
IS CALLEB T H I N KING?
tonists. This is is not

not fust
just aa chronological designation but but aa
downgrading. For For Plato is is considered the the greatest thinker,
not only among the
not the Greeks, but but ofof the
the entire West.
\Vest. Why?
vVhy?
Not because his his thoughts have ever been established as as the
the
greatest in in tenns of of what the the task of of thinking is.
is. II would
would
not know how that could ever have
not have been
been done
done by by anyany
thinker. Nor would II know by by what yardstick we
what yardstick we could
could ever
ever
appraise anyany thinking as as the
the greatest. As As great
great--quite pos-
quite pos-
sibly. But thinking so so far
far has
has presumably
presumably not not even
even raised
raised
the question m
the in what the the peculiar
peculiar greatness
greatness ofof Plato's
Plato's
thought consists-assuming assuming the the greatness
greatness of of any
any given
given
thinking lies in in the
the wealth
wealth of of its
its problematic.
problematic.
Plato isis considered
considered the the West's
West's greatest
greatest thinker
thinker because
Platonism-that
Platonism that is, is, those things which we subsequently
those things subsequently
adopted andand adapted
adapted out out ofof Plato's
Plato's thinking
thinking and along
along with
it-has
it undeniably exercised
-has undeniably exercised the the most powerful
powerful influence
influence
on Western thinking.
on Western thinking. But are are we really
really satisfied
satisfied that the
greatness of any tMnMng
of any thinking can be computed computed from the length length
and breadth
breadth of of its
its effects,
effects^ and assessed
assessed by by the volume of
assent itit has
has gained?
gained? And if if effect
effect and influence are are toto be
our
war yardsticks,
yardstickSy then what would Plato, Plato, and with him Soc Soc-
rates, be without Pannenides?
rates, Parmenides?
Plato
Plato himself has kept kept his origins in mind and memory
his origins
far essentially than did the Platonism that came after
far more essentially after
him. The masters
masters always
always have an indelible indelible and therefore
deeper
deeper knowledge
knowledge of of their
their roots
roots than their disciples
disciples can ever
achieve.
achieve.
But toto this
this day,
day Platonism is
7
is struck with naked terror if if
it
it is
is expected
expected to to consider
consider what lies lies behind this
this philosophy
philosophy
of Plato,
of Plato, which it interprets and
it interprets and posits asposits as the only
only binding
binding
philosophy. If
philosophy. we do
If we do consider it, ?
it we can do it only in this
it only this
way:
way we :we saysay that
that early
early thinking
thinking is is not yet
yet as
as advanced as
Plato's.
Plato's. To To present
present Parmenides
Parmenides as as a pre-Socratic is
a pre-Socratic is even
more
more foolish
foolish than
than to to call
call Kant
Kant aa pre-Hegelian.
pre-Hegelian.
But
But equally
equally mistaken
mistaken is
is the
the reverse
reverse procedure
procedure into
into which
PAET II
PART 185
iff
we are
are easily
easily drawn by by any
any emphatic
emphatic mention of of thinkers
such
such asas Parmenides. We We then adopt adopt the the view that the the early
thinkers,
thinkers^ being first in
being first in point
point of time, are
of time, are first and foremost
in
in every
every respect-for
respect for which reason
reason it it is
is then deemed advis-
able
able to philosophize only
to philosophize only in in this pre-Socratic manner, and
this pre-Soeratic
to
to pronounce
pronounce all all the rest
rest a misunderstanding,
misunderstandiiig a 7
a retrogres-
sion.
sion. Such childish
childish ideas
ideas are actually in
are actually in circulation
circulation today.
We mention them only
"\Ve only in in view
"view ofof thethe wayway which we are are
trying
trying toto take.
take.
When we take this this way,
way ? we come to to the
the point
point where we,
in
in thought
thought and inquiry,
inquiry retrace
?
retrace the the questioning
questioning of a thinker
of a
by
by starting
starting from his his own thinking
thinking and from nowhere else.
This task
task differs
differs inin every
every respect
respect from the the frequently
frequently heard
demand that we must understand aa thinker thinker in in his
his own
terms. That is
terms. is impossible, because no thinker
impossible,, because thinker-and and no poet
-understands
understands himself.
himself. How then could could .anybody
anybody else dare
claim
claim to to understand a a thinker--even
thinker even to to understand
understand him
better?
The wish to to understand a thinker thinker in his own terms is
in his is
something
something else else entirely
entirely than the the attempt
attempt to to take
take upup a
thinker's quest
quest and to to pursue
pursue it it to
to the
the core
core of of Ms
his thought's
thought's
problematic.
problematic. The first first is impossible. The sec
is and remains impossible. sec-
ond is rare, and of all
is rare, aU tlrings
things the difficult. We shaH
the most difficult. shall
not be allowed to to forget
forget this
this difficulty
difficulty for for aa single
single moment,
moment,
in
in any
any of of the lectures
lectures to to follow. To speak speak of of an "attempt
"attempt atat
thinking"
thinking'' is is not an empty phrase meant to simulate hu
empty phrase hu-
mility.
mility. The term makes the claim that that we are taking
are here taking
a way
way of of questioning,
questioning, on which the the problematic
problematic alone is is
accepted
accepted as as the unique
unique habitat
habitat and locuslocus of of thinking,
thinking.
But inin view of of the
the rashness
rashness of of our public,
public, let let us note also
also
something
something else. else. ItIt 'may
may easily happen that
easily happen that soon
soon-even
even
tomorrow--the
tomorrow the slogan slogan is is promulgated:
promulgated: "Everything"Everything de de-
pends
pends on the problematic!"
problematic!" That cry cry seems to identifyidentify the
crier
crier as
as one of of those
those who are inquirers.
inquirers. Today Today every
every state
state-
ment either
either becomes stale stale and irrelevant
irrelevant at at once,
once, or else
else
186
IH6 WHAT
WHAT IS C A 1. 1. E 0 THINKING?
I* T HI N It I N (j )
stays caught in
in an in:r.idious ambiguity against which the
the
individual is
is helpless.
"')(Jiq
**XP^ T&ro >.fytw Tt
T VOEiP T• lav lp.p.&aA"
T* ft*
We speak and hear the

the saying paratactically, but
but still
still in
in the
the
usual translation : :
n
"Needful: the
the saying also
: also thinking too be."
too: being: to be.
: :
But we certainly do not take para tactic to

do not to mean not-yet
not-yet syn-
syn-
tactic. Nor do do we rank it as primitive. We keep it
it as it clear ofof
any comparison with the the speech ofof children and of primi primi-
tive peoples. We also leave the
tive the question open whether^
whether, when
aa child says nothing but "moon" at at the
the sight of
of the
the maon,
moon,
or responds to
or to the
the sight of the moon with aa word he has
of the
made upup himself-whether there is is not
not at
at work here,
here, for
for aa
short moment, a speech far far more primary
primary thanthan in
in the
the most
exquisitely wrought sentence ()f the man of
of the of letters.
letters. Is
Is this
this aa
reason toto elevate thethe speech and art
art ofof children
children toto the prin
prin-
ciple of a new form of speech, and a new art
ciple of art form? No.
Such propositions stem from abstract abstract considerations,
considerations, and
are
are the exact counterpart of the fabrications of the age
the fabrications of
age of
technology, which are somethingsomething else else again
again than the es- es-
sence of technology.
technology.
We call
We call the word order of the saying
of the saying paratactic
paratactic in the
widest sense
sense simply
simply because we do not not know what else else to
to
do. For the saying
do. speaks where there are
saying speaks are no words
words,? in the
field
field between the words which the colons indicate.
colons indicate.
language is
Parmenides' language language of a thinking;
is the language of
thinking^ it it is
is
that thinking
thinking itself.
itself. Therefore,
Therefore^ it also speaks
it also differently
speaks differently
from the still
still older
older poetry
poetry of
of Homer.
We shall
We shaU now follow Parmenides'
Paraienides saying
7
saying word for word word,?
without taking
taking the the view that it it is merely a sequence
is merely sequence of of
words.
words.
Xpr}
X/oi? comes from the verb XP^* xpijcrâi. XPfjo-Oru.. The word dede
rives from 7}17 xdp,
rives from ê hand j XP ^? XPctop.w.
X V? the 1
'Xpa&paA means:
means II handle
:
PAJRT II
PART 187
IS?
and so so keep
keep in hand,
handy II use, haw use
use, II have for. Starting with this
use for, this
use that is Is practiced
practiced by man, we shall try
by man, try to
to point out out the
the
nature
nature of using.
using. It It is
is not anything that man first produces
anything
and performs. "Using"
performs. "Using" does
does not mean the the mere utilizing,
using
using up, up, exploiting.
exploiting. Utilization
Utilization is is only
only the
the degenerate and
debauched form of use. When we handle aa thing, for
use. 'When for exex-
ample,
ample, our hand must fit fit itself
itself toto the
the thing.
thing. Use implies
fitting
fitting response.
response. Proper
Proper use does not debase what is
does not is being
used--on
used on the contrary,
contrary, use is is determined and defined fey by
leaving
leaving the used thing thing in its essential nature.
its essential nature. But leaving
it
it that way way does not mean carelessness,carelessness, much less less neglect.
On the contrary:
contrary: only only proper
proper use use brings
brings thethe thing to to its
its
essential
essential nature and keeps keeps it it there. understood, use itself
there. So understood,
is the summons which demands that
is the that aa thing
thing be admitted to to
its
its own essence
essence and nature,nature, and that that the
the use
use keep
keep to it.it. To
use
use something
something is is to
to let
let it
it enter into
into its
its essential
essential nature^
nature, to to
keep
keep it it safe
safe in its
its essence.
essence.
Proper
Proper use is is neither a mere utilizing, nor a mere need
utilizing, need-
ing. What we merely
ing. merely need, need,, we utilize
utilize from the necessity
necessity of
aa need. Utilizing
Utilizing and needing always fall
needing always fall short of proper
proper
use.
use. Proper
Proper use is rarely manifest,
is rarely manifest, and in in general
general is is not the
business
business of mortals.
mortals. Mortals are are at at best
best ffiumined
illumined by by the
radiance
radiance of of use.
use. The essential
essential nature of of use can thus never
be adequately
adequately clarified
clarified by by merely contrasting it
merely contrasting it with utili
utili-
zation
zation and need. need. We We speak custom, of what
usage and custom,
speak of usage
we are are used to.to. Even such usage usage is is never of its its own making.
making.
It
It hails
hails from elsewhere,
elsewhere, and presumably
presumably is is used in the the
proper
proper sense.
sense.
Now,
Now, when this word, in
this word, in the form xp% )(pf,, is
is mentioned at at
the outset
the outset ofof a thoughtful
thoughtful saying,
saying, and this this particular
particular say say-
ing,
ing,
we may
may assume without fear fear of being
being arbitrary
arbitrary thatthat
the u
the "using"
using" mentioned here is is spoken
spoken in a Mgh, high, perhaps
perhaps
highest, sense. We
the
the highest, sense. We therefore translate translate xpyxp/] with "It "It isis
useful
useful . . .."
. . " The translation directs us to
translation directs to give
give thought
thought to
something
something that that not only only is is not customary
customary to to our waysways of of
Hl8
188 IS CALLED TliDiltiNG?
WHAT IS
fonning ideas, but that must for for the

the moment remain alto-
gether unthought.
"It
**It is
is That like "it
**it is
i^ raining, it it is
is windy,
it
il is
is dawning."' Grotmmar and logic call such sentences im-
personal, subjectless sentenct>s. Xp'lj, then, would be aa sen-

tence willwut a4 subject. Tht* Latin pluit, it Is raining, is
it is is
of
<rf that kind. Raining refers to to no person. Accordingly, the
sentence is is impersonal. Or does rain rain the the same \vay
thunder thunders? Or does evt>n this statement miss the
mark? \V c are groping in in the dark.
The term "impersonal, subjectless sentences" determines
only something negative, and even that perhaps inade-
quately. For in in sentences of of this type,
type, there is is always the
"it."
"it/" Of course, one never ought to to talk about the the "it" so
"it" so
long asas the essential realm has not been brought into into view
10 which the word appeals. "It,"
to "It," we explain, means the the
impersonal. "It" "It* means something neither masculine nor
7
nor
feminine. "It" means neither of of the
the tw0
two, but the
7
the neuter.
neuter.
Of course.
But since when has it il been established that the the personal,
personal,
the difference of the
and the the genders, arc all we need in
are all in order
order
4i
to think the "it"
to it" properly-and
properly and that means to to maintain it it
in its
its problematic
problematic-simply simply by by contrasting "it" "it" negatively
negatively
with the personal and the genders? The fact
the genders? fact that
that such
such state
state-
ments as as "it is windy, it
is windy 7
is snowing,
it is snowing, it is thawing,
it is thawing, it it is
is
dawning" and so
dawning" so on,
on, speak with special
special urgency
urgency and fre fre-
quency of
quency of the
the weather,
weather, is is something
something to to think
think about.
about. We
must understand "weather" here in in the
the widest
widest sense
sense, of
?
of
atmospheric conditions
atmospheric conditions and storms that that show on the the face
face of
of
sky. Nobody
the sky. Nobody would claim that that grammar
grammar and logic logic have
have
adequately elucidated
adequately elucidated the the nature of of these
these curious
curious sentences
sentences
-"adequately"
"adequately" here meaning meaning also with the necessary
also with necessary re re-
serve. Nor would it
serve. it seem to
to be their
their business.
business.
"
"It is
"It is useful." Who or what is "It,"
is "It 7
ask; and our
we ask}
question comes too
question too soon and is is too
too crude.
crude. ForFor once again,?
once again
PART II
PAl\T t89
|
scraple y we accept
without cause and without scruple, accept it
it as
as an estab-
lished
Mshed fact
fact that one can and may ask about
may ask about this "It"
**lt" exclu-
sively in
sively in terms of what,
what, "It"?, or who,
"It"?, or who, "It"?
"It"? Of course, "it
"it
is
is useful" does not speak
speak of a phenomenon
phenomenon in in the
the sky, like
"it
"it is
is raining."
raining." As translation
translation of the "XfYI/,
of the the phrase "it
xp*J the
7
"it isis
useful" belongs
belongs rather in in the company
company of of "there is." This
"there is." This
frequent
frequent turn of phrase phrase was mentioned when we tried to to
characterize
characterize what gives gives food for thought before
for thought before allall else--
what is is most thought-provoking. It
thought-provoking. It gives gives us food food forfor
thought.
thought. (On "there is," is," compare
compare BeingBeing and Time, Time, lastlast
par. 43
part of par.
part 45 and the beginning
beginning of par. 44.
of par. Also Letter
44. Also Letter &n on
Humanism, p.
Humanism, p. 22.)
22.)
Could it it be that only
only the
the "it is useful"
"it is useful"-thought through
thought through
generously
generously and adequately-would
adequately would define defme more closely closely
what "there is" is" says?
says?
Could it it be that only when we have
only have extended
extended our our quest^
quest,
inquired adequately into
inquired adequately into useuse and usageusage--that only then
that only then
the "it" in "it "it is
is useful" would achieve achieve itsits radiant
radiant appear-
appear
ance?
We therefore point
We point once more to to the
the high
high sense
sense ofof use
as
as we here say say it.
it. What it it tells
tells us becomes clearerclearer only
only inin
the context of the complete
complete saying
saying which speaksspeaks inin the
the sense
XPTJ· Even so,
of X/M?- so ? a more informal reflection
reflection on "it "it is
is useful"
may
may bring
bring us closer
closer toto the matter.
"It isis useful . . .."
. . "means
means something essential than
something more essential
"it
"it isis needful." For Parmenides'
Parmenides* saying saying is is not concerned
with a need in the usual sense, sense nor with a brute necessity,
?
necessity,
and least of all
least of all with blind
blind compulsion.
compulsion. The plirase phrase "it is
"it is
useful" could evoke such meanings. meanings. But even then we must
first
first ask
ask in every
every casecase where that assonance steins from, a&d
stems from, and
whether it it does
does notnot give
give voice to to an "it is useful" thought
"it is thought
in
in aa deeper sense. Such is
deeper sense. is the case Hoelderlin. We
case with Hoelderfin. We shall
shall
cite
cite two passages
passages from his Ms poetry.
poetry. But the remarks which
follow
follow do not not mean to to suggest
suggest that Hoelderfin
Hoelderlin says says the same
thing
thing as does Xf¥11,
as does XP% as as though Parmenides' thinking
though Parmenides* thinking could
190
190 WHAT
W H A. T IS CA. L LED THINKING?
IS CALLED THIN It IN G ?
be interpreted by
be by being traced back to
to passages from
Hoelderlin's poetry.
In the
In the last
last stan7.a of bis hymn "The
of his "The Ister River,"
River," Hoel-
derlin says : :
"It is
"It is useful for
for the
the rock to
to have shafts,
And for
for the
the earth, furrows,
furrows,
It would be
It be without welcome, without stay."
stay."
There Isis no
no welcome where no-
no meal, no food and
no food drink can
and drink can
be offered. There is
be is no stay here for
for mortals,
mortals, in
in the
the sense
of dwelling at
of If mortals are
at home. If are to be made
to be welcome and
made welcome and
to stay, there must be
to stay,
be water
water from the rock, wheat from
the rock, from the
the
field:
field;
"It is
"It is useful
useful for
for the
the rock
rock to
to have shafts.
shafts,
And for
for the
the earth,
earth, furrows."
Shafts pierce
pierce thethe rock. They break aa path
rock. They path for the waters.
The Greek word for for pierce
pierce is KlVTpov is
KO"T'iiv; Klwrpow
is xerr&>; is the spike.
spike.
The centaurs
centaurs owe their their nature to to the piercing spear. This
piercing spear. This
piercing
piercing
and path-breaking
path-breaking is part of "what gives
is part gives life."
life."
Hoelderlin,
Hoelderlin 7 too, sees it
too, sees it in
in this
this light,
light, as as one ofof Ms
his enigmatic
enigmatic
translations
translations of of Pindar fragments
fragments (Hell.(Hell. V, 2 272) clearly
V, 2,
7 clearly
shows.
shows. There it it says: be
says "The idea of centaurs may well he
: well
the
the idea
idea of
of the
the spirit
spirit of a a stream,
stream, sincesince the stream makes a a
path
path and aa border,
border, by by force,
force,, on the earth that originally originally
is
is pathless
pathless andand gTOwing
growing upward.
upward. Its Its image
image is is therefore in
in
the
the place
place ofof nature
nature where
where the
the bank
bank is is rich in rocks and grot-grot
toes.
toes. . . .."
, * "
"It
"It is
is useful
useful forfor the
the rock
rock to to have
have shafts/
shafts/ And for for the
earth,
earth, furrows."
furrows." We We should
should be be listening
listening altogether
altogether too too
superficially,
superficially, and and thinking
thinking tootoo little,
little, if we were
if we were to to inter-
inter
pret
pret the
the "it
"it isis useful"
useful' here
here to
1
mean only
to mean only "it"it is
is neces-
neces
sary ...."
sary . ." Shafts
Shafts areare no
no more
more necessary
necessary to to the
the rock
rock than
than
furrows
furrows to to the
the earth.
earth. But
But it
it belongs
belongs to to the
the essence
essence of of wel-
wel
come
come and
and being
being at at home
home that
that it
it include
include thethe welling
welling of of water
water
and
and the
the fruits
fruits ofof the field. "It
the field. "It is
is useful"
useful" sayssays here:
here there
: there is
is
PART
PART II
II 191
Iff
an essential community
an community between
between rock and shaft, between
furrow and
furrow and earth, within that
earth, within that realm
realm of
of being which opens
up when
up when thethe earth
earth becomes
becomes aa habitation. The
The home and
dwelling of
dwelling of mortals
mortals has its own
has its own natural site. But itsits situa-
tion is
tion is not
not determined
determined first
first by
by the
the pathless places on
on earth.
It is
It is marked
marked outout and
and opened
opened byby something
something of
of another order.
From there,
From there, the
the dwelling
dwelling of
of mortals
mortals receives
receives its
its measure.
Summary and
Transition
The key
key word in in Parmenides*
Parmenides' sayingsaying is XP'].
is XP 1 ^ ^w
?- We now trans-
e trans
late it
late it with "it "it is
is useful."
useful." Even on on superficial
superficial examination
the saying
the saying speaks
speaks of of stating
stating and of of thinMng
thinking,7 of of being,
being, of of
Being. It
Being. It speaks
speaks of of the
the highest
highest and the the deepest,
deepest, the most
remote and the the nearest,
nearest, the the most veiled
veiled and the most appar appar-
ent that
ent that mortal tale tale can tell.
tell. This gives
gives us us the
the occasion
occasion and
the right
the right to to assume that that the
the word XP XJYIJ,
7
??
too,? iiss spoken
too spoken in in the
highest sense.
highest sense.
"To
44
To use" means,means, first,
first, to
to let thing be what it
let a thing it is
is and
how it it is.
is. To let
let itit be this
this way requires that the used thing
way requires thing
be cared
cared forfor in its
its essential
essential nature--we
nature we do so by by responding
responding
to
to the
the demands which the used thing thing makes manifest in in the
the
given
given instance.
instance. Once we understand "using" "using" in this sense, sense y
which is is more natural to us, and in which using
to us, designates
using designates
aa human activity,
activity, we have already already differentiated it it from
other
other modes
modes of of acting
acting with
with which it it is easily and readily
is easily readily
confused
confused and mixed up from ; from utilizing,
utilizing, and from needing. needing.
In
In common
common usage, however, XfY11
usage, however, maJ mean
XP1? may ê^ those things
11 those things as as
well.
well.
A wide
A wide range
range of of meaning
meaning belongs
belongs generally
generally to to the
the nature
nature
of
of every
every word.
word. ThisThis fact,
fact, again,
again, arises from the
arises from the mystery
mystery of
language. be
it be
language. Language
Language admits admits of of two
two things One, One, that
: that it
reduced
reduced to to aa mere
mere system
system of of signs,
signs, uniformly
uniformly available
available to to
everybody,
everybody, and and in in this
this form
form be be enforced
enforced as as binding;
binding $ and and
two,
two, that
that language
language at at one
one great moment says
great moment says oneone unique
unique
thing,
thing, forfor one
one time
time only,
only, which
which remains
remains inexhaustible
inexhaustible bebe-
19!2
192 WHAT
IS THINKING?
cause itit isis always originary, and thus beyond the the reach of of
any kind of
any of leveling. These two two pos...,ibilities of of language
are far removed from each otht-r that we
are so far we should not not be
be
doing justice to to their disparity even if if we
we were to call them
to call
extrf'me opposites.
Cust.omary speech vacillates between these two two possible
in which language spt>aks. It
ia It gets caught halfway.halfway.
Mediocrity becomes the Commonness, which
the rule. Commonness, which looks
much likelike custom, attaches itself to rule. Common
the rule.
to the Common
speech puffs itself up up as
as tie
the sole
sole binding rule rule for
for everything
everything
we say-and now every word at at variance with with it it immedi
immedi-
ately looks like an
ately
an arbitrary violation. The
arbitrary violation. The translation
translation of of
the word XP%
the XP77, likewise,
likewise, appears arbitrary
arbitrary if if instead of of say
say-
ing "One should"" we say
ing
say "It
"It isis useful
useful . . ..""
. ,
But the
But the time may may finally
finally have come to to release
release language
language
from thethe leash of of common speech speech and allow it it to
to remain
attuned to the keynote
to the keynote of lofty statement it
the lofty
of the it makes
makes-
without,
without, however,
however, rating
rating customary
customary speech speech as as a decline,
decline, oror
as low. It
as low. It will
will then no longer suffice to
longer suffice to speak
speak of lofty
of a lofty
statement, for for this,
this, too,
too, is,is, at least in name,
at least in name, still rated by
still rated
low standards.
standards*
Why
Why this this reference
reference to to language?
language? In order to stress once
again
again that
that we are are moving
moving within language, language, which means
moving
moving on shiftingshifting ground
ground or, or, still
still better,
better, on the billowing
billowing
waters
waters of of an ocean.
ocean.
Xpr]:
X/>i? "It
: "It is
is useful . . .."
. . " Thought
Thought in its its high
high significa-
significa
tion,
tion, that
that means:
means to: to admit
admit intointo essential
essential nature,
nature, and there
to
to keep
keep safely
safely what
what hashas been
been admitted.
admitted. To attune our ear to
this
this meaning
meaning of of the
the word,
word, we we shall
shall try
try to
to clarify
clarify "it is is use-
use
ful"
ful by
7'
by means
means of of two
two passages
passages from from Hoelderlin's
Hoelderlin*s poetry.
poetry.
One passage is from
One passage is from the hymn the hymn "The
"The Ister
Ister River":
River" :
"ItIt is
is useful
useful for
for the
the rock
rock to
to have
have shafts,
44
shafts,
And for
And for the
the earth,
earth, furrows,
furrows,
ItIt would
would be be without
without welcome,
welcome, without
without stay."
stay."
FART
PART I I
II 19l
In this
IB this passage,
passage, thethe "useful"
4
*usefuJT designates anan essential
community of
community of rock
rock and
and shaft,,
shaft, earth
earth and
and furrow.
furrow. This
This essen-
tial community
tial community is in turn
is in tum detemiined
determined byby the
the nature of
of '"'el-
come and
come stay. The welcoming,
and stay. welcoming, and
and the
the staying,
staying, are
are what
marks the
marks the dwelling
dwelling of mortals
mortals on
on this
this earth.
earth. But
But dwelling,
in its
in its tum
tum, is
?
is not
not grounded
grounded within
within itself.
itself.
LECTURE
LECTURE
VIII
·-·
The other passage of Hoelderlin's poetry
of Hoelderlin's poetry is
is found in the
hymn "The Titans":
Titans" :
"For under the finn measure,

firm measure^
The crude,
crude, too, is useful^
too, is useful,
That the pure may know itself/'
pure may itself."
"Under the firm measure" means for Hoelderlin "under
the sky."
sky." According
According to to the late begins "There
poem that begins
late poem
blooms in lovely
loYely blueness . . . /*
. , " the face of the sky
. . sky is
is the
place where the unknown God conceals himself. "Under
place
the firmament,"
firmament/' under the sky sky so so conceived^
conceived, there is
is the
site earth. On earth itself
site where mortals inhabit the earth. itself there
is
is no firmament,
firmament^ no firm measure. It It cannot be derived
from the earth,
earth ? especially
especially since the earth can never by by
itself
itself be habitable earth.
earth.
". . . under the firm measure^

. * measure,
The crude,
crude, too, is useful."
too y is
The crude is
is not an addition to
to the pure.
pure. Nor does the pure
pure
have need of the crude. But the crude must be there
there in order
that the pure
pure may
may become manifest to to itself
itself as the pure
as the pure and
thus as that which isis other,
other, and thus may may have itsits own
being.
being. "Under the firm measure,"
measure/* on the earth under the the
194
194
PART II
PART 195
IS5
sky, itself can be the pure

sky, the
the pure
pure itself pure only
only as as it
it admits the the
crude
crude close
close to to its
its own essence and there there holds it. it. This does
not
not affirm
affirm the crude. Yet the crude exists by by rights, because
it
it is
is being
being so so used with essential rightness.
essential lightness.
All
All this difficult thinking. A mere dialectic, with
this makes difficult thinking.
its
its Yes and No
No,7
can never grasp it. Besides,
grasp it. Besides, possible misin-
terpretations
terpretations threaten on all all sides. neither are
sides. For neither are we deal-
ing
ing here with a gross justification of
gross justification of the
the crude,
crude, taken by by
itself,
itself, nor
does the crude appear merely in
appear merely in the
the role of of aa
catalyst
catalyst to to bring
bring forth purity,
purity by
,
by itself.
itself. For,
For, "under the
firm
firm measure" there exists esdsts neither the the splendid
splendid self-sover-
self-sover
eignty
eignty of the pure, pure nor the self-willed
?
power of
self-willed power of the
the crude,
crude,
each cut
cut off
off from itsits counterpart
counterpart which it it uses.
uses.
Once more,
more, the "It "It isis useful
useful . . .."
. . " signifies
signifies an admitadmit-
tance
tance into
into the essence,
essence, by by which the the habitation
habitation on earth earth is is
granted
granted and assured to to mortals, that is,
mortals, that is, kept
kept in
in safety
safety for
for
them. And aa still still deeper
deeper nature of of "using"
"using" is is concealed
concealed in in
the eighth
eighth stanza of the hymn hymn "The Rhine." We We are still
unprepared
unprepared to to think itit through.
through.
In translating
translating XP^? XP"] in Parmenides'
Parmenides* sayingsaying with "it is use
"it is use-
ful,"
ful," we respond
respond to to a meaning
meaning of XP"]1 tib
of XP ?
at echoes in the
that
root
root word. Xptfop.a.,
Xpoo/juu means turning something to
turning something to use
use by
handling
handling it-which
it which has always turning to
always been a turning thing
to the thing
in
in hand according
according to to its
its nature, letting that
nature, thus letting that nature
become manifest by by the handling.
handling.
But thinking
thinking can so so far
far have onlyonly a vague
vague intimation of of
that high
that high meaning
meaning of of XP"],
xptfy "it is useful/*
"** is useful;' which speaks speaks in in
Parmenides'
Parmenides' saying.saying. The "it "it is useful" which must here be
is useful"
thought,
thought,
and which Parmenides nowhere elucidates, elucidates, con con-
ceals
ceals a a still
still deeper
deeper and wider sense sense than the word does does inin
Hoelderlin's
Hoelderlin's language. Perhaps we shall
language. Perhaps shall be able able to hearhear
Hoelderlin's
Hoelderlin's language
language properly
properly onlyonly when we comprehend
comprehend
the "it is
the "it is useful"
useful" that
that isis beginning
beginning to to sound in in the XP"l off
the x/>*f
Parmenides'
Parmenides* saying.saying.
The user
user lets the used thing
lets the thing enter intointo the property
property of of its
its
t196
96 WHAT IS C ALL ED THINKING?
WHAT tS T H t N Kt NG?
own natun>, and there preserves it it. This admitting and

preserving is is what distinguishes the the using of of which we are
are
speaking here, hut in n0 way exhausts its
in no its nature. Vsing,
thought ofof inin this way, is
is no longer, is is never the
the effect of
of
man's doing. But conversely, all all mortal doing belongs
within the
the realm in tie XtnJ makes its
in which the its appeal. Using
commends the the used thing to its own nature and essence. In
to its
this using there is is concealed a command, a a calling. In the
XfYif of
of Pannenides' saying, a call is
a call is identified, although itit
is
is not
not thought out, much less less explicated. Every primal and
proper identification states something unspoken, and states
it so
it so that it
it remains unspoken.
"XP"'l : ro A.iynv TE
T 1IOEL11 T
FOC4F TE"
"It is
"It is useful: the
the stating so
; so thinking too
thinking too "
The Greek verbs A.eyEw VOEI.v, according
XeyiF and *oc!)' according to
7
to the die-
dic-
tionary, are
are here translated correctly. dictionary in-
correctly. The dictionary in-
fonns us that A.iyEw
AJyar means to state, and WCF
to state voiiv to
y
to think.
think. But
what does "stating''
"stating" mean? What does "thinking"
"thinking" mean?
A.E-yEw as
The dictionary which records Alyco* as stating and POOP as
VOELV as
thinking, proceeds as though the meaning of of stating and
thinking were the the most obvious things in in the world. And
the world.
in a certain way,
way that is
?
is the case.
case.
However,
However^ the usual case is is not the
the case
case ofof Pannexiides'
Parmenides'
saying.
saying. Nor isis it the case
it the case of a translation such as as aa thought
thought-
ful dialogue
dialogue with the saying face.
saying must face.
We simply
We simply do not notice what violence crudity we
violence and crudity
commit with the usual translation, precisely because it
translation, precisely is
it is
correct according
according to dictionary, how we turn everything
to the dictionary, everything
upside
upside down and throw it it into confusion. It
into confusion. does not even
It does
occur to us that in the end, ?
better in
end or here tetter beginning
in the beginning
of Western thinking,
thinking, the saying
saying of of Parmenides speaksspeaks toto
us for the first
first time of what is thinking. We miss
called thinking.
is called miss the
the
point,
point therefore,
?
theref ore ifif we use the word thinking in the
? thinking the trans
trans-
lation* For in
lation. in that
that way
way we assume that that the
the Greek text text is
is
PAKT
PART II
II 197
197
already speaking
already speaking ofof thinking
thinking as as if
if it
it were aa fully settled
matter, whereas
matter, whereas inin fact
fact the
the text
text only
only leads
leads up
up 10
to the
the nature
of thinking.
of We
th.inki:sg. We may
may not
not give
give "thinking'*
"thinking" as as the
the translation
of either
of A.fyEw taken
either Xeyo> taken by
by itself,
itself, or VOEiJI taken fey
or POOP by itself.
Yet we
Yet we have
have been
been told
told often
often enough
enough that
that logic,
logic, the
the theory
of the
of the Xoyos and its
and AEyELv, is
its Xeya*>, is the
the theory of thinking. Thus
theory of Thus
).1-yEiv taken
\&y*ip taken by
by itself
itself already
already implies
implies "thinking."
"thinking." Certainly.
Certainly.
The same holds
holds true
true in the same
in the same way
way even
even of VOEiv. For
of POOP. For this
word, too,
word, too, is used
is used by
by Plato
Plato and Aristotle
Aristotle to identify think-
to identify
ing.
ing.
Thinking is
Thinking is specifically Sw.-Ai-ywDa.r. and SM-mmar&G^
specifically Sia-Xey0ô& Sw.-JIOE'w-IJcu.
Both A.eyEiv and vo&v
Both Xeya> are seen
PDEiv are seen as
as the
the definitive
definitive character
character-
istics of
istics of the
the nature
nature of thinking. But where and when? Only
of thinking. Only
at the
at the time,
time, surely, thinking readies
Greek: thinkiag
surely, when Greek its com
:reaches its com-
pletion with Plato
pletion with
Plato and Aristotle. But we are
Aristotle. But are inquiring
inquiring back
into the past,
into the past, are
are asking
asking for call which was first
that caU
for that first to
to
summon AEyEW Xeyo> and voelvvoiiv to
to that
that nature which,
which, subse
subse-
quently, restricts
quently, restricts itself
itself to
to a mode whose determination will will
be
be ruled
ruled by
by logic
logic as
as the essence thinking.
essence of tMnMng.
".
". . • TO
. . A.lyEw TE
TO Xeyeu' voelv TE
r VOE'iv A. €-yEw so (the)
re:: the Xeyco* voiiv
(the) POCSF
too," from
too," that
that is
is both,
both, in
in their
their community,
community, constitute that from
which
which thethe nature
nature ofof thinking one
thinking first begins to emerge in
first begins to emerge in one
of
of its
its basic
basic characteristics.
characteristics.
That
That the
the current
current translation
translation has about it it something
something un-un
even
wholesome,
wholesome, even :impossible, ought to become clear
impossible, ought
clear even
at
at aa superficial glance. But to make this observation,
observation, wewe
superficial glance.
need
need toto make an an assumption a thinker
assumption : that Parmenides was a thinker
:
who, would set Ms words

words
who, particularly in such
such aa saying,
saying, would set his
particularly in
down
down with
with thought
thought andand deliberation.
deliberation. To see the the difficulty
difficulty
we
we have in mind, we must the
mind, we must for
for the
the moment keep
have in keep toto the
usual
usual translation.
translation.
"Needful:
"Needful the
the saying that being
being is."
saying and
and so
so thinking, too, that
thinking, too,
:
is."
This, that being is, is what

what is
is to be stated
to be and thought.
stated and thought,
This, that being is, is
The sentence
The momentous
momentous andand astonishing
astonishing character
character of
of the
the sentence
S8
198 W H AT IS
I S CALLED THIN KING ?
••being is"
is" has
has been stressed. In can we ever first
In general, can
say such aa
say sentence and only afterward think it? it? Must we
not om
not the
on the contrary have thought the the sentence first, how-
ever vaguely, so so that we may then say say it-assuming the the
word means something vastly different from thought-
less chatter? Clearly, the
less the saying does not not require us first first
merely to 10 say
say that being is, is, and then give thought to to the
the
matter afterward.
But how can can the
the saying nonetheless mention the >..€:yav
the XeyciF
the JIOEiv, when both are
before the not merely
are not merely required
required by by an
indefmite "it is needful," but
"It is but rather constitute what admits
the "it
the useful" into its
is useful"
"it is its essence and there there holds
holds it?it? We can
overcome this this obstacle raised by the current
by the current translation
translation
only ifif we translate neither AEYELv nor w4F
neither Xcyco* thoughtlessly,
POELV thoughtlessly,
neither Xi-yEw with "saying"
Xeycir with "saying" nor poet? VOELV with "thinHng."
"thinking."
However, AE-yEw
However, Xlyet? undeniably
undeniably means to to state,
state, toto report,
report, toto
tell. Of course. But we come back with the the question
question: what
:
in the
in "stating" mean? We
the world does "stating" 'We maymay not challenge
challenge
that AE')'ELV signifies "stating."
Xlyw signifies "stating.*
7
But it
it is
is just
just as
as certain
certain that
that
>.kyEw,
hfyWj understood as as "stating,"
"stating," does does not mean speakingspeaking in in
the sense of activating
activating the organs organs of of speech,
speech, such as as the
mouth and tongue,
tongue, the teeth,teeth, thethe larynx
larynx and the lungs lungs and
so
so forth.
forth.
Let us at at last
last speak:
speak out out and say "stating" means!
say what "stating"
Let us at at last
last give
give thought
thought to why and in
to why in what way way the
Greeks designate stating with the word >..E-yav.
designate "stating" AEyEW
6t T?
Xeyo>. For XlyetF
does
does inin no way way mean "to
4t
to speak." meaning of AEyEW
speak.' The meaning
7
Xeyeo*
does not necessarily
necessarily referrefer toto language
language and what happens happens in
language. The verb >..€yew
language. Xcyctp is is the same word as the the Latin
legere and our own word lay.
Legere lay. When someone lays lays before us
a request,
request, we do not mean that he produces produces papers
papers on the
desk before us, us, but that he speaks speaks of the request.
request. When
someone tellstells of
of an event,
event, he lays lays it
it out for us. When we
for us.
exert ourselves, we lay
exert ourselves, lay to.
to. To lay before, lay
lay before, lay out,
out, lay to--
lay to
all
all this
this laying
laying is is the Greek AEyEW. Xeyea>, To the Greeks,
Greeks, thisthis word
PART
PART II
II 199
199
does not
not at any time mean something
at any "stating," as
something like "stating," as
though the
though the meaning
meaning came out out ofof aa blank,
blank, a void, but the the
other way
other way around: the Greeks understand
the Greeks understand stating in in the
light of laying out
light of laying
out, laying
7
laying before,
before, laying
laying to, for this
to, and /or
reason call
reason call that
that "laying" 'AI.ya.v.
"laying" XeyaF.
meaning of
The meaning of the
the word Xoyos 'A6yos- is
is determined accord
accord-
ingly. Parmenides Mmself
ingly. himself, with all
,
all the
the clarity
clarity one could
wish for,
wish for, teUs us elsewhere
tells us elsewhere what Xoyos AOyoS' means. In In fragment
7, the thinker is kept out
7, the thinker is kept
out ofof aa dead-end way way of of thinking,
and is
is at
at the
the same time warned against against the
the other
other way
way which
is also
is also open, the one that
open, the that mortals
mortals usually
usually follow.
follow. But that
way of
way of itself leads to
itself never leads to what is is to-be-thought,
to-be-thought. However,
However,
the warning
the warning against
against thethe usual
usual wayway of mortal men does
of mortal does not
that this
mean that this way
way is is rejected. Warning is
rejected. Warning is a form of of pre
pre-
serving us from something.
serving something. There speaks speaks inin the
the warning
warning a
call to be careful,
call to careful, toto have a a care for something.
care for something. In In the text
text
that follows, the thinker
that follows, thinker is is being against the usual
being warned against
way
way of men against
of mortal men: mistaking the common view,
against mistaking
: view,
which has a judgment
judgment ready ready beforehand on aH all and every
every-
thing,
thing, for the wayway of thinking,
thinking, justjust as
as though
though generalities,
generalities,
and the habit of generalities,
generalities, were
bound to true. The
to be true.
warning
warning runs : :
"p:qU cr'lOos-
os 'TTo'AVrra.pov ooov KaTa -n]v& {3WnfJM,
cr
,... , -TrovirapOF
, ,.oF,Kara , ,
vwp.av acrKO'TTOV op.p.a Kat. 'TJ")(tJECTCTav aKauTJV
KaL yXc5crcrai>, Kpivcu, 8£
/ecu y'A.Wa-crav, Sc 'A.6yCtU
Xoycw ••• " .
"And let you into this

let not much-current habit force you this way,
to
to let
let roam sightless
sightless eyes
eyes and noise-cluttered ear
ear
and tongue, rather discriminate in reflection . . .."
tongue, rather " * ,
Here 'A6yos-
Xoyo* isis sharply
sharply contrasted
contrasted with unreflecting
unreflecting gawking
and
and ear-cocking chatter. In the text yA.Oxrcra,
ear-cocking and chatter. yX<Smro, the
the tongue,
tongue,
mere chatter, immediate and almost brutal con
chatter, is is placed
placed in immediate
brutal con-
trast
trast to
to 'AO-yos-, the
not the
Xoyos, reflection.
reflection. What isis demanded here is is not
but
nimble
nimble tongue
tongue chattering away of all
dbtattering away
all and everything,
everything, but
aa 'Aeyuv
Xeyeo> of
of the
the 'Aayos-,
Xoyos, and
and only
only through
through these the Kpl.v£w:
ic/wa> toto:
200 WHAT S CCALLEB
W H AT IIS THINKING?
A L LED T HI N KING ?
discriminate one thing from another, to to bring out one thing

and putput another into the the background. This is Is the
the crisis that
constitutt-s criticism.
But again we ask: what does A.iynv XlyeF mean? We are are farfar
from playing etymological games when we point out: out:
AE')'EU' does of of mean to to state, but stating is is to
to the
the
Greeks in essE>nce a laying. How curious, curious, thatthat stating
stating is is to
to
be a laying? Do we intend with this reference reference to to shake the the
foundations of of all
all philology and philosophy
philosophy of of language,
language,
and to to expose them as as sham? Indeed we do. do. But what is is
laying itself? With this question, question, the the elucidation

elucidation of of the
the
essence of AEyEW
Alyar as as laying
laying isis merely beginning. The eluci-
merely beginning. eluci
dation
dation cannot be given given here in in detail
detail (see(see Logos,
Logos, aa con-con
tribution to to Festschrift
Festschrift for Jantzen, 19
for Hans Jantzen, 52,y ed.
1 952 ed. by by
Kurt Bauch).
Bauch) .
When
\Vhen we lay lay something
something down, down ? oror out,
out, we make it it lie.
lie.
Then it it lies before us. us. But something may
something may lie lie before
before us also
us also
without our first first coming on the scene to
coming to lay
lay itit down. The
sea lies
sea lies before us, us, and the mountains. To lie, in Greek is
lie, in is
KE'iuOa.t. What lies
icr$oi. lies before us is is the inroKEf.p,evov, in
the wo*cefiF0F, Latin
in Latin
subiectum. It might be the
It might the sea, or a village,
sea, or village, or a house,
house, or
anything
anything elseelse of kind. Only
the kirud.
of the Only aa minute fraction
fraction of of what
lies before us
lies before us in
in this
this way
way has been laid laid down by by man,
man, and
even then only only with the the aid
aid of lying there
of what was lying there before.
before.
The stones
stones from which the the house is is built
built come from the the
rock.
natural rock.
The Greeks,
Greeks, however,
however, do not think think of of what is is lying
lying in in
this sense
this sense as as being
being in in contrast
contrast with what is is standing.
standing. Not
just the tree
just tree that
that has been laid laid low,
low, but
but also
also the
the tree
tree that
that
stands straight
stands straight before
before us is is something
something lyinglying before
before us,us, just
just
like the sea.
like sea. The Greek word #0*19, accordingly, accordingly, does does notnot
mean primarily
primarily the act act of
of setting
setting up,
up, instating,
instating, but but that
that
which
which is is set
set up$
up; that
that which has has set
set itself
itself up,
up, has
has settled,
settled, and
and
as such
as such lies
lies before us. us. co-is is is the
the situation
situation in in which
which aa thing
thing
is lying.
is lying.
PART
PAII.T II
II 201
201
For example,
For example, when
when Plato
Plato speaks of
of throtflcra?,
inro/Jluat;, at
at the
the end
of the
of the sixth
sixth book
book of The Republic
of The Republic where he he describes the
the
methods of
methods of mathematics,
mathematics, $<TI$
fJluLt; means
means neither hypothesis
(assumption) in the
(assumption) in the modern
modern sense,
sense, nor
nor does itit mean aa
"mere presupposition";
"mere presupposition"; rather,
rather, the
the tb&tecri?
inrOihcnt; isis the
the under-
lying foundation; the situation
lying foundation; the
situation ofof the
the foundation, that
which is
which is already
already given
given to
to and
and lies
liesbefore
beforethe
the mathematicians: :
the odd,
the odd, the
the even,
even, the
the shapes,
shapes, the
the angles.
angles. These
These things that
lie already
lie already before
before us,
us, our
our models,
models, the
the vratflGnog,
inroiJECTE£t;, are
are de
de-
scribed as o>$
scribed as cf>avEpa
wt; $ai*pe (510
(510 d)
d) ::as what is
as what is evident
evident to
to every
every-
body-the
body things we let
die things let be.
be.
These things
These things that
that lie
lie already
already before
before us
us are
are not,
not, however,
however,
what lies
what lies farther
farther back
back inin the
the sense
sense of
of being
being remote.
remote. They
are supremely
are supremely dose
close by,
by, toto everything.
everything. They
They are
are what has
come close
come close by,
by, beforehand. normally we fail
beforehand. But normally fail to see them
to see
in
in their presence.
their presence.
Plato, however,
Plato, however, in in that
that famous passage,passage, seessees something
something
which every
every thinker has to
thinker has to see afresh each time,
see afresh else he is
time, else is
not
not a a thinker:
thinker that
: that everything
everything that that lies
lies before us is is ambigu-
ambigu
ous.
ous. This
This ambiguity,
ambiguity, as as we shall
shaU see, declares itself
see, declares itself for
for the
first
first time,
time, and definitively,
definitively, in the saying
saying of Parmenides.
Even where the the meaning
meaning of the the Greek &<nv fJI.uLt; comes close
close
to
to what
what we call call setting
setting up,
up, and instating,
instating, even there what
has
has been set set up to the Greeks that which has
up always
always means to
has
come
come to to lie, and so does
does lie, before us.us. What is is set
set up is
lie, and so
is
lie,
released into
released into the
the freedom
freedom of of its
its station,
station, and is is not the effect
effect
of
of our
our doing sub
doing andand thus
thus dependent
dependant on us. us. Because of the sub-
sequent
sequent employment
employment made made of of the
the terms
terms thesis,
thesis, antithesis,
antithesis,
and
and synthesis--especially
synthesis especially byby Kant
Kant and German Idealism-
and German Idealism
we
we hear
hear inin the
the word
word thesis
thesis atat once
once and
and only
only the
the spontaneous
spontaneous
action
action and
and movement
movement of of the
the idea-forming
idea-forming subject. Conse
subject. Conse-
quently we find it difficult to hear hear in in all
all its
its purity
purity whatwhat the
the
quently we find it difficult to
Greek
Greek word
word says what
and what
says when
when fJI.utt;
0&ns still
still refers
refers toto lying
lying and
lies
lies before
before us.
us.
What isis essential
What essential toto lying
lying is is not
not that
that it it is
is opposed
opposed to to
202 WHAT
IS CALI*EB THINKING?
standing; both in in what is

is lying and inin what is is standing, the the
essential is
is that itit appears, having come forward of of itself.
Thus we speak even today of of books that have "just "just ap ap-
peared." The book has
peared." has appeared, that is,is, it
it lies
lies before
before us,us, it
it
is there, and in
is in its it can now concern us.
its presence it us.
AE')'Ew, concerns what lies
Laying, Xjyci?, there. To lay
lies there. lay isis to let
to let
lie before us,
lie us. 'When we say something, we
say something about something,
make it lie there before us,
it Me us, which means at at the same time
we make it This maJdng-to-appear
it appear. TM$ making-to-appear and letting-lie-
letting-lie-
before-us is, in Greek thought,
is, in thought, the
the essence AE')'EW and
essence of Xlyep
The essential nature

nature of of stating
stating isis not determined by by thethe
phonetic character
character of of words as signs. The essential
as signs. essential nature
of language is
of is illumined
illumined by the relatedness
by the relatedness of of what lies lies
there before
before usus to this lettizig-Ue-bef
to this letting-lie-before-us. However, this
ore-us. However ?
this
nature
nature ofof language
language remains hidden from the the Greeks.
Greeks. TheyThey
have never expressly
expressly stressed it, much less
stressed it, less raised
raised it to the
it to the
level
level of a problem.
problem. But their statements operate
their statements operate in this this
realm.
The relations
relations of which we have spoken spoken here are are so so
weighty
weighty and far-reaching
far-readting that they they remain simple.
simple. This is is
why
why men overlook them constantly, constantly^ with an almost un un-
imaginable
imaginable obstinacy.
obstinacy. Our modern pundits still totally
pundits stiH totally lack
lack
the sensibility
sensibility to relations we have here men
to evaluate the relations men-
tioned. translate the >..E-yf.w
tioned. To translate X!ya> in Parmenides*
Parmenides' saying saying with
"the statement" is is correct,
correct, according
according to the dictionary
to the dictionary, but
it
it says
says nothing.
nothing. On the contrary,
contrary, thatthat translation
translation embroils
us in an impossible
impossible demand we must make on Parmenides: Parmenides :
to wit,
wit, that saying
saying is necessary first,
is necessary
first, and that
that thinking
thinking then
has to follow after.
after. But if translate ro
if we translate TO >..E-yf.tv
Xeya? in in the
the sense
sense
"xM ro 'AE-yf.w
explained^ then "')(!Yf]:
we explained, :
A>w •••.""means
. . means "It "It is
is use-
use
ful : to
:to lay,
lay let
?
let lie
lie before
before us . . .."
. . "
Only
Only now can we see our way way to what follows.
follows. But even even
now,
now, and more so so than before,
before, we must not not translate
translate the the
voliv that follows
follows with "thinking,"
"thinking," a word which the the cur-
cur-
PART
PART II
II 25
203
rent translation
rent translation babbles
babbles as
as thoughtlessly
thoughtlessly as
as it
it does "saying"
for 'AE-yEw.
vVe shall
We shall proceed
proceed moremore cautiously,
cautiously, translating voav with
"perceive," rather
"perceive/' rather thanthan saysay "thm|ing"
"thinpng" straight out out with
the implication
the implication thatthat what
what waswas said
said is
is obvious-
obvious. YetYet nothing
is gained
is gained if if in
in the
the translation
translation of of mmw
voliv we we now replace
"thinking" with
"thinking'
1
with "perceive/
"perceive," as1
as long
long as as we
we do do not become
involved in
involved in what voliv indicates,
what FOCIF indicates. Above
Above all,all, we
we must not not
accept "perceive"
accept
*
immediately as
'perceive" immediately as the
the one
one perfectly
perfectly fitting
translation, especially
translation, especially not if if we
we intend
intend "perceive"
"perceive" only in in
the sense
the sense that
that isis reflected
reflected in in the
the statement:
statement: "I "I perceive aa
noise."
noise."
"Perceive" here
"Perceive" here means the the same thing as
same thing as receive. Noov
receive. Noctr
so translated
so translated-to use aa Kantian distinction
to use distinction for for the sake of
convenience--is
convenience pointing toward perception
is pointing perception in in the
the sense ofof
receptivity, as distinguished
receptivity, as distinguished from
spontaneity with
the spontaneity
which we assume this this or attitude toward what we per
that attitude
or that per-
ceive. In
ceive. In receptive perception we remain passive,
receptive perception passive, without
the active
the active attitude
attitude to to what is perceived. But such passive
is perceived.
acceptance
acceptance is is precisely
precisely what vo&v voiiv does not mean. This Tills isis
why,
why, in lectures
lectures II gavegave years
years ago,
ago, I insisted
insisted that voiiv, as
that vo&r, as
perceiving,
perceiving, included also also the active
active trait of undertaking
undertaking
something.
something.
In
In voliv,
votvy what is is perceived
perceived concerns us in such a way that
a that
we take
take itit up something with it. But
up specifically,
specifically, and do something
it. But
where do do we taketake what is to be

is to be perceived?
perceived? How How do we tal:e take
it
it up?
up? We take take it
it to
to heart.
heart. What is is taken to heart,
heart, however,
is
is left
left to
to be
be exactly not
exactly as as it
it is.
is. This
This taking-to-heart
taMng-to-heart does does not
make
make overover what
what is takes. Taking
is takes. Taking to to heart is: to keep
is; to keep atat
heart.
heart.
N oov
NO?F is is taking
taking something
something to to heart.
heart. TheThe noun
noum to to the verb
the verb
voliv, which is voW, originally means
FOCIP, which is FOOS, FOW, originally
means almost
almost exactly
exactly
what
what we we have
have explained of
explained earlier
earlier as as the
the basic
basic meaning
meaning of
thane, The frequent idioms b
Greek idioms mr
thane, devotion,
devotion, memory.
memory. The frequent Greek
vcp ExElV andand XcUpE cannot be
x^R* *>6<p cannot be translated
tnmslated with "to keep
with "to keep
S4
204 WHAT
IS CALLED THINKING?
in
in one's reason 7 " mud
and "he Is
is glad in his reason," but: xa:i.FJE
in Ms
is glad at
fee is b wp
at heart; IF vtp lx.EW, to
to keep in
in memory.

X,rf, 'TO X^yr
Xfljj ri* Xqew--"It is useful, the
lt is
*4
. " What
the telling . . ." 'What does
. .
M-ye&v mean? As early early asas Homer,

Homer, the the word signifies telling
aa tale, and reporting. But But besides, since
since early
early times and over
over
aa wide area, in all its
in all its many
many variants
variants and derivations
derivations itit
means as as much as as laying.
laying. It It can easily
easily bebe confirmed thatthat
XfyEw means both telling
XlyetF laying. The two meanings
telling and laying. meanings
are
are soso far
far apart that they
apart that they do notnot interfere
interfere with each other.other.
A/ryor;,
AJyos a?
a word thatthat later
later attains
attains thethe supreme
supreme heights
heights of
theological speculation, and X^X
theological speculation,
X£xo<>,
?? a word that that designates
designates
so
so common an object object asas aa couch,
couch, have after after all
all nothing
nothing toto do
with
with each
each other.
other. Why, then, should we be troubled by
Why, then, by the
undeniable
undeniable multiplicity
multiplicity of of meanings
meanings of of the XlyEw?
the word X^yw?
Wee are
'\V are so
so busy
busy anyhow
anyhow with routine routine that we imagine
imagine thethe
course
course of of the world,
world, too,
too 7 can be controlled
controlled with routine
routine
measures.
On the other hand, hand, we may thoughtful in face
may become thoughtful
of the
the fact
fact that Xyw means both stating
that XE-ynv laying. To
stating and laying.
modem man,
modern man, such thoughtfulness
thoughtfulness will of course seem en en-
tirely
tirely out of place,
place, not to to say
say eccentric-and
eccentric and in any
any event
useless.
useless. Yet modern man will will perhaps
perhaps forgive
forgive us for re re-
minding
minding him that this this remarkable word Xeya>, Xl-yEw, Xoyos or
rather what it it signifies--is
signifies is at
at the root
root of Western logic.
logic.
Without the A.l.-yuv
Xeyca* of that logic,
logic, modern man would
have "k> $o make do without his Ms automobile. There would be
no airplanes,
airplanes, no turbines,
turbines, no Atomic Energy Energy Commission.
Without
Without the the Xl.yE.w
Xeyco* and
and itsits Xoyos 7 Christianity
Christianity would not
have
have the doctrine of of the
the Trinity, theological in-
Trinity, nor the theological in
terpretation
terpretation of the concept concept of of the second Person of the
Trinity.
Trinity. Without
Without the the Xl.yE.w
XeyaF and its its Xoyos^ there would
have been no Age Age of of Enlightenment.

Enlightenment. Without this this Xl.yEw,
XeyecF,
there
there would
would be be nono dialectical
dialectical materialism. Without the
PAUT II
PART I5
205
of logic,
logic, the world would look different. But it it Isis
speculate on how the world would then look.
idle to speculate
But isis it
it not just
just asas idle
idle to go into this undeniable pecu-
to go
liarity
Marity of the Greek word AE"f'EW, Xlyei^ that it it means at at one time
lay/* and at
"to lay," at another time "to "to tell"?
tell"? ItIt is
is idle. It
It is
is even
useless-and
useless and what is is useless
useless belongs BO no place. Thus it it is
is out
out
of place
place wherever it it appears. This fact
appears. fact has
has peculiar conse-
quences. We
quences. We do not here make the the claim that we are are capable
of dealing
dealing with the useless; useless we only
5
only raise the the possibility
discussion of AEyE£V
that a discussion Xeyew as as "laying"
"laying" and "telling""telling" might
at some time be of some little
at use. And so,
little use. so, in
in the
the end, we
ask once again.
ask again.
We ask:
We ask what is
: is it
it that
that takes place when AeyetF
takes place Xi-yEw means
both "to lay" lay" and "to tell"?
tell"? Is it only
Is it only byby accident
accident that these
meanings
meanings come together together under the the common roof roof ofof thethe
same word-sound? Or is is there something else?
there something else? Could it it be
be
that
that that
that which is is the
the essence
essence of telling, that
of telling, that which is is called
AE";Et.V,
Aeyo>, has come to light light as a laying?
laying? In what essentialessential fonn
does language
language come to light, light, when its its statement is is taken
over and accomplished
accomplished as as a laying?
laying?
We must thus first
We first ofof all
all make dear clear what laying
laying means.
It is remarkable that we must first
It is first clarify
clarify something
something like like
laying,
laying, something
something we do daily daily and hourlyhourly in many many ways.
ways.
The thing matters when we lay
thing that matters lay something,,
something, the thing thing
by which laying
by laying comes to to be laying,
laying, is this: what must be
is this :
laid
laid lies there, and henceforth belongs
lies there, belongs to to what already
already lies lies
before
before us. us. And what lies lies before us is is primary,
primary, especially
especially
when it lies there before
it lies before all all the laying
laying and settingsetting that are are
man's work,
work, when it it lies
lies there prior to
there prior all that man lays
to all lays out,
out,
lays
lays down,
down, or lays lays in
in ruin.
To the
the Greeks,
Greeks, telling
telling is is laying. Language has its
laying. Language its essen
essen-
tial
tial being
being in telling. If
in the telling. If toto the Greeks the nature of of thethe
poetic tale is determined by
poetic tale is by the laying,
laying, it it must be that
that laylay-
ing
ing and lyinglying and what lies lies before them Mes lies close
close to
to their
their
heart so definitively that to the Greek even that which is,
heart, so definitively that to zs,
and
and not onlyonly the
the statement
statement of it, it, reveals itself and is
reveals itself is deter-
deter-
206
306 WUAT IS CALLED THINKING?
THI:SJUNG "!
mined by by the
the laying and the the lying. Sea Sea and mountains, city
and island, temple and sky sky lie
lie before man and emerge into
appearance as as they lie
lie there.
VVhen man finds himself among what so so lies
lies before him,
should he not not respond to to it
it in
in allall purity by by letting it it He
lie
before him just as as it
it lies? And this letting-lie, would it it not
be that laying which is the stage 10?
is die for all
all the
the other.Ja:ying
that man perfonns? Thus laying would now suddenly
emerge as as aa relatedness that pervades man's stay 0n on this
earth from the the ground up up---though we have never asked
where this relatedness originates. Then XlyF Al-yEw, as
?
as aa laying
and aa letting-lie, would be be something uncanny in the midst
in the
of all
all the
the current canniness of of human existence?
Al'}'Ew as
And XlyesF as aa telling? Telling
Telling is is the
the business of of Ian-
lan-
guage. VVhat does language tel? tell? What language tells, tells, what
it
it speaks and what it it keeps silent, is is and remains always
always and
everywhere what is, is ? what can be, be, what has has been
been,7 and!
and what
is
is about toto come--most directly abundantly where the
directly and abundantly
tenns "is"
"is" and "be""'be" are not specifically
specifically given
given voice.
voice. For
whatever is is put
put into language in in any
any real sense is is essen-
essen-
tially richer than what is is captured
captured in audible and visible
in audible visible
conformations, and as
phonetic conformations, falls silent
as such falls again when
silent again
it
it is put in
is put in writing.
writing. But even so, every statement remains in
so ? every
a mysterious
mysterious manner related related to all that
to all called up
that can be called up by
by
aa "There is is . . .."
. . "
"There is
is aa light
light that
that the wind has put
put out.
out,
There is
is an inn on the heath which a drunkard leaves
leaves in
the afternoon.
afternoon.
There is
is a vineyard,
vineyard, burnt and black with holes
holes full
fuH of
spiders.
spiders.
There is
is a room which they they have white-washed with
milk.
The madman has died ...." . ."
This is
is not written in a textbook of
of logic,
logic, but elsewhere.
elsewhere.
Laying,
Laying^ thought
thought as
as a
a letting-lie
letting-lie in the widest sense,
sense, re-
re-
PART II
PART 207
to what in the widest sense
lates to lies before
sense les before nsus,7 and speaks
without a sound:
without sound there is.
: is.
To laylay and to to tell

tell relate
relate in the same mode to to the
the same, in in
the
the mode of a letting-appear.
letting-appear. Telling Telling turns
turns out
out to
to be
be aa lay
lay-
ing,
ing,
and is called AE')IEW.
is called Xeyep.
Xpf) ro
Xp-1] TO 'AE-yew
Xeyeo* TE • • • "Useful is
r . . . is the
the letting-lie-before-
letting-lie-before-
us also.
us also JIOE'iv."
voehf." This word JIOE'iv wmp doesdoes not not originally
originally mean
"thinking"
"tfainfchig" any any more than does 'AE')'Ew. The two have be
does Xcyeo?. be-
come joined
joined in closest
closest kinship
Unship only only byby virtue
virtue of
of their
their origi
origi-
nal
nal nature,
nature, and are later later reduced to logic transacts as
to what logic as
the
the essence
essence of thinking.
thinking. Noa? NDE'iv implies
implies aa perceiving
perceiving which
never
never was nor is is a mere receiving of
receiving of something.
something. The JJOE'iu
perceives
perceives beforehand by by taking
taking to to mind and heart. heart. The
heart
heart isis the wardship
wardship guarding
guarding what lies lies before
before us us,7 though
this
this wardship
wardship itselfitself needs that guarding which is
that guarding is accom
accom-
plished in
plished the 'AE')'Ew
in the Xeyau as as gathering.
gathering. Noos and MWS voils,? therefore,
therefore,
do not originally
originally signify
signify what later later develops into reason
develops into reason;
j
yoo? signifies
signifies the minding
minding that has somethingsomething in mind and
takes
takes it to heart. Thus JJOE'iv
it to also means what we understand
vmlv also
by
by scenting-though
scenting though, we use the the word mostlymostly of animals
animals,7
in
in nature.
Man's scenting
scenting is is divination.
divination. But since by now we under
since by under-
stand
stand allall knowledge and all
knowledge all skill in terms of
skill in of the thmMng
thinking
of
of logic,
logic, we measure "divination" by by the same yardstick.
yardstick.
But the word means more. Authentic divination divination is is the
mode in in which essentials

essentials come to to us and so so come to mind,
to mind,
in
in order
order thatthat we may may keepkeep them in in inind.
mind. This kind of
divination is
divination is not the outer
outer court before
before the gates
gates of knowl
knowl-
edge.
edge. It It is
is the
the great
great hall
hall where everything
everything that can be
known is is kept,
kept, concealed.
concealed.
translate vDE'iv
We translate votlv with "take to to heart,"
heart.''
''XJYT/ ro 'AeyEw n 110€'iv n .•. "
"Useful
Useful is
is the
the letting-lie-before-us (the) taking-to-
also (the)
letting-lie-before-us also
heart too . . .."
." .
LECTURE
LECTURE
IX
·-.
We translate >..eyuv
We XcyciF 'l.vith
with letting-lie-before-us,
letting-lie-before-us, and vofliv
with taking-to-heart.
taking-to-heart. This translation
translation is is not only
only more ap ap-
propriate
propriate but also also clearer. We shall
clearer. "\Ve shall set
set the essentials
essentials down,
down,
and apart,
apart, in four points.
points.
((I)
1) The translation
translation clarifies
clarifies whywhy and in in what way way
AE')'EW precedes VOELV
Xeyeip precedes POC&F and therefore is is mentioned first. Let-
first. Let
ting
ting things
things lie
lie before us is is necessary
necessary to- to supply
supply us with what, what,
lying
lying thus before us, us, can be taken to to heart. .Ai:yEL:v is
heart. Aeycw is prior
prior
to VOE'i:v,
FQC&F, and not only only because it it has to be accomplished
accomplished first first
in order that VOE'i:v
FOCO* may
may fmd
find something
something it it can take to to heart.
Rather,
Rather, X^yci^ also also surpasses VOEI:v, in that it
surpasses IÔC^F, it once againagain
gathers,
gathers, and keeps keeps and safeguards gathering, what
safeguards in the gathering, what-
ever VOEI:v
FOCO> takes to hearty >..fyEr.v, being
heart; for Xeyo>, being a laying,
laying, is is also
also
legere,
Ieêre that is,
7 is, reading.
reading. We We normally
normally understand by by read
read-
ing
ing only
only this,
this, that we grasp
grasp and follow a script script and written
matter. But that is is done byby gathering
gathering the letters.letters. Without
this
this gathering,
gathering, without a gleaning gleaning in the sense in which
wheat or grapes gleaned, we should neTer
grapes are gleaned, never be able able toto
read aa single
single word,
word, however keenly keenly we observeobserve the written
signs.
signs. (2)(2) Thus >..iyEr.v
Xeya> and vOEI:v
vo&v are coordinated not only only
in series, first >..iyEw
series, first Xeya> then vOEI:v,
voctF, but each enters enters intointo the
other, AfyEw,
other. Ac-yew, the letting-lie-before-us,
letting-lie-before-us, unfolds of its own
of its
accord into the VOE'i:v.
voziv. What we are talking talking about here is is
anything
anything but leaving
leaving something
something where it lies while we pass
it lies pass
208
PART
PAB.T II
II 209
byindifferently.
by indifferently.For Forinstance^
instance,when whenwe weleiletthetheseasealielie before
us as
us as itit lies,
lies, we,
we, inin Xeyap 7 are already engaged in
are already in keeping
in mind
in mind and and heart
heart what
what lies lies before
before us. us. We \Ve have already
taken to
taken to heart
heart what
what lies
lies before
beforeus. AkyEwisis tacitly disposed
us. Alyctp
JIOELJI.
to FOCiF.
tO
Conversely, FOCF
Conversely., liOE'iv always
always remains A.l."fEw. When
remains aa XeyctF. When we v..-e take
heart what
to heart
to what lies
lies before
before us, us, wewe take
take itit as as itit isis lying. By By
taking to
taking heart and
to heart mind, we
and mind, we gather
gather and focus ourselves on on
what lies
what lies before
before us,us, and
and gather
gather whatwhat we we have
have taken to to heart.
Whence do
Whence do we
we gather
gather it? it? Where
Where else else but
but to to itself, so so that it it
may become
may become manifest
manifest such such as as it
it of
of itself
itself lies before us. us. The
The
language of
language of the
the saying
saying is is indeed
indeed exceedingly
exceedingly careful. It It
does not
does not justjust tie A.lye£v to
tie Xcyeo' VOE'iv by
to F0u> by aa mere
mere mi, Ka.!, "and"
"and";; rather,
the saying
the saying runs runs: TO
: >..£-yEw re
TO Xeyco' VOELJI TC.
TE poctF This TTe--TE
TE. This T has aa re re-
flexive meaning,
flexive meaning, and says says: the
: the letting-lie-bef
letting-lie-before-us ore-us and the
taking-to-heart
taking-to-heart enter upon
enter upon and into into one another,
another, in a givegive-
and-take. The relation
and-take. relation between Xeya^ AE"fEW and wcfp VOEiv is is not a
patchwork
patchwork of of things
things and attitudes
attitudes otherwise alien alien t0 to each
other.
other. The relationrelation is conjunction, and what is
is a conjunction, is joined
joined here
is, each of of itself, related to, that that is,is, connatural with the
with the
is, each itself, related to,
other.
other. According!
Accordingly, translate ro
y' we translate TO A.E-yEw
XeyeiF TE TC VOE'iv
FOC^F TE:re the
: the
letting-lie-before-us such
such (as too
letting-He-before-us (as this),
this) the taking-to-heart
, taMng-to-heart too
(such
(such as as thethe other)
other).. ((3) 3) This translation does not just Just
bring out more appropriately the meaning meaning of the the two words words
bring out more appropriately
AE')'E£V and JIOE'iv; audible in in
Xeyw and vociv, itit alone
alone makes
makes the the entire
entire saying
saying audible
what
what it it says. The saying does does not
not presuppose
presuppose what what is is called
says. The saying
thinking, but first indicates the the fundamental
fundamental traits traits of what
of what
thinking, but first indicates
subsequently defines itself as as thinking.
thinking. The The conjunction
conjunction of of
subsequently defines itself
>..£yew and vOELJI first announces what
Xeyeo' and voetv first announces
what is is called
called thinking.
thiokkig.
The
The possible restriction of ofthinking,
thinking, to to the
the concept
concept of think
of think-
possible restriction
ing established by logic, isis here
ing established by logic, only in
here only preparation. M')'EU'
in prepamtion. Alyetr
andvOE'iv,
and both by virtue
virtue of oftheir
their conjunction,
conjunction, achieve achievewhat what
Focti/, both by
called
later, and only for
later, and only
for aa short time, is
short time, is specifically
specifically called
M"'JfkVew: to disclose and keep disclosed disclosed what what is uncon
is uncon-
dXqfe&ci': to disclose and keep
cealed.
cealed.
The of A.lyew and JIOE'iv
ve&v lies that
The veiled
veiled nature
nature of Xeyw and lies in in this,
this, that
210 WHAT
WHAT IS THINKING?
IS CALLED THINlt.ING?
they correspond to
to the
the unconcealed and its
its unconcealed-
ness. Here we receive an art intimation of of how x.JYIJ, which

governs thethe conjunction of of >..iyEw and VOEiv, is is expressed
through To make us us see

see this more clearly would
require a translation of of the
the entire opening section of \Vhat
is usually called Pannenides' Didactic Poem. But first we
is
must give thought to to' something else; something that leads
up
up to
to what bas has been intimated, and what, without being
specifically discussed, illumines the the matter indicated at at the
the
end of our lectures.
The conjunction of of AE')'EiV
AeyciF and F0?F however, is
VOE£v, however,
7
is such
such
that it
it does not rest upon upon itself.
itself. Letting-lie-before-us and
Letting-lie-before-us
taking-to-heart in in themselves point point toward
toward something
something that that
touches and only thereby thereby fully defmes them.
fully defines them. Therefore,
Therefore,
the essential nature of of thinking
thinking cannot be adequately
adequately de de-
fined either by
fined by AkyEw,
X^yeiy, taken
taken alone,
alone, or or by
by voiw
VOEiv, taken
7
taken alone
alone,
?
or again by
by both together
together taken as as aa conjunction.
conjunction.
Later
liter on,
on, that course
course is nonetheless. Thinking
is taken nonetheless. Thinking bebe-
).i-ya:v of the \&y$ :in
comes the Xeyar the sense
in the sense of
of proposition.
proposition. At
the same time,
time7 thinking becomes the VOELv voeaf in the sense
in the seise ofof
apprehension by by reason.
reason. The two definitions definitions areare coupled
coupled
together, and so
together^ so determine what is is henceforth
henceforth called
called think
think-
ing in the Western-European
ing in Western-European tradition. tradition.
The coupling
coupling of AE')'EW and FO&F
of Xeyea> as proposition
voii:v, as
?
proposition and as as
reason, are
reason^ distilled into what the
are distilled the Romans call ratio. Think
call ratio. Think-
ing appears
ing appears as as what is is rational. Ratio comes from the
rational. Ratio the verb
verb
reor. Reor means to
reor. to take
take something
something for for something
something--vOEiv; vo&v^
and this
this is at
is at the same time to to state
state something
something as as something
something
-AEYE£V.
Xeyap. Ratio becomes reason. Reason is the subject
is the subject matmat-
ter of
ter of logic.
logic. Kant's main work,, work, the Critique of
the Critique of Pure Reason,
Reason,
deals with the critique
deals critique of of pure
pure reason
reason by by way
way ofof logic
logic and
and
dialectic.
dialectic.
But
But the
the original
original nature of >..kya.v and we2p
of Mr/ear VOEiv, disappears
?
disappears in in
ratio. As ratio
ratio. ratio assumes dominion^
dominion, all all relations
relations areare turned
turned
around. For medieval and modern philosophy
around. philosophy now explain explain
PART
PART II
II 21!
211
the Greek essence

the Greek essence of AeyEw and
of Xeya^ and TOC^F, and vam in
VOEtl', Xoyos and in
tenns of
terms their own
of their concept of
O'\vn concept ratio. That
of ratio. explanation, how
That explanation, how-
ever,
ever, longer enlightens
no longer enlightens-it obfuscates. Hie
it obfuscates. The Enlighten
Enlighten-
obscures the
ment obscures the essential
essential origin
origin of
of tMnMng.
thinking. In
In general,
it blocks
it blocks every
every access
access to to the
the thinking
thinking of of the
the Greeks.
Greeks. But But that
is not
is not toto say
say "that
that philosophy
philosophy after after the
the Greeks
Greeks is is false
false and a
mistake. It
mistake. It is
is to
to say
say atat most that
that philosophy,
philosophy, despite
despite all logic
all logic
and all
and all dialectic,
dialectic, does does notnot attain
attain toto the
the discussion
discussion of of the
the
question "What is
question is called thinking?" And philosophy
called thinking?" philosophy strays strays
farthest from this
farthest question when k
this hidden question it is
is led
led to to think
that thinking
that thinking must begin begin with doubting.
doubting. (4) (4) If If we now
listen
listen still
still more carefully
carefully than before,before, for
for what X^yer AE'}'W' and
state in
vOE'i:v state
F0C4F in the translation;5 if
the translation search the
if we search the conjunction
conjunction
of the
of the two forfor aa first
first glimmer
glimmer of the the essential
essential traits
traits of think-
of think
ing-then
ing then we shall shall be extremely careful not
extremely careful not to to take
take what
the
the saying
saying states
states forthwith for for aa rigid
rigid definition
definition of of think
think-
ing.
ing. If
If we continue
continue to to be careful,
careful, we shall shall instead
instead findfind
something
something curious.
curious. It It will
will strike
strike us as as strange
strange--and that
and that
impression
impression must in no way way be softened.
NotF, taking-to-heart,
NOEi:v, taking-to~heart, is is determined by 'AeyEw. This
by XeyeF.
means two thingsthings : :
First, FOCIF unfolds out of A.lyEtv.

First :voe'il'
? Xeyco/. Taking
Taking is is not grasping,
grasping,
but letting
letting come what lies lies before us.
us.
Second, FOC&F is
Second, J.'OEtJ.' is kept XcyctF. The heart into which
kept within A.eya.J.'.
it
it takes
takes things
things belongs
belongs to gathering where what lies
to the gathering lies
before
before us is is safeguarded
safeguarded and kept kept a.S
as such.
such,
The conjunction
conjunction of of A.Eyew
XeyctF and vOE'i:v
FO^F isis the fundamental
characteristic
characteristic of of thinking
thinking which here moves into its its essen-
essen
tial
tial nature.
nature. Thinking,
Thinking, then, then^ isis not a grasping,
grasping, neither the the
grasp
grasp of of what lies
lies before us, us, nor an attack
attack upon
upon it. it. In Xcyer
and J.'OE'il',
F0o>, what
what liesMes before us is is not manipulated
manipulated by means of of
grasping. is not grasping prehending. In la the
the
grasping. Thinking
Thinking is grasping or prehending.
high
high youth
youth of of its
its unfolding
unfolding essence, thinking knows noth-
essence, thinking noth
ing
ing ofof the
the grasping concept (Begritf).
grasping concept (Begriff) The reason is not at
. is at
all
all that
that thinking
thinking was was thenthen undeveloped.
undeveloped. Rather,
Rather^ evolving
evolving
212 WHAT CAtlLED TH1HEIN6?
WHAT IS CALLED THINI't.ING?
thinking isis not yetjet confined within limits that limit it it Ibj
by
setting bounds to to the evolving of its essential nature. The
of its
confinE>ment which follows latE'r is is then, of
of course, not
not con-
sidered a loss
!0ss or aa defect, but rather the the sole gain that think-
ing
ing has toto offer once itsits work isis accomplished by by means of of
the concept.
But all
all of
of the great thinking of of the Greek thinkers, inin-
cluding Aristotle, thinks non-conceptually. Does it there-
it there-
fore think inaccurately, hazily? N0 No, the very

very opposite: it
7
it :
thinks appropriately, as as befits the

the matter. Which is is to
to say
say
also: thinking keeps to
: to its
its way
way ofof thinking. It It is
is the
the way
way
toward what is is worthy
worthy of of questioning, problematical. What
questioning, problematical.
particular beings in in their
their Being might
might be,be, still
still remains an
everlasting question
question even for Aristotle. At the
for Aristotle. the end of of my
my
book on Kant and the the Problem of of Metaphysics
Metaphysics (1929)
(1929),7 II
call attention
attention toto aa long-forgotten statement from Aristotle's
long-forgotten statement Aristotle's
treatises on 1\Jletaphysics,
Metaphysics, which runs runs: :
,,
KQ.£ VIJ
"jcat
'
S^ KQ.£
, '
TO '7TU.J\a.L
icai TO iraAcu TE
..!\ '
jtcu V1JV Kal
re KQ.L vw
,... '
ai, r
KQ.L Q.E&. fiyroO/iCFOF
,.. ' , ,
KQ.L del
':."'JTC111JL£VOV icat aEl.
, , ' , .,,
airopavp&w n
a'1T'OfXY!Jp.&ov TO ov
ri TO OP • • •." .
"And so it it remains something to

something to be looked for,
for, from of
of
old and now and forever,
old forever, and thus
thus something
something that
that offers
offers
no way
way out : what is being . . . ??"
is being
T*
: . . .
It
It profits
profits nothing,
nothing, of course, that we now quote
course, that quote this
this state
state-
ment of Aristotle again,
again, if
if we neglect
neglect toto hear that
that it
it relent
relent-
lessly
lessly insists
insists on our taking the road into
taking into what is is problemati
problemati-
cal.
cal. His persistence
persistence in that questioning attitude separates
questioning attitude separates
the thinker Aristotle by by an abyss
abyss from all that Aristote-
all that Aristote-
lianism which,
which, in the manner of of all followers, falsifies
all followers, falsifies what
is
is problematical
problematical and so produces clear-cut counterfeit
produces a clear-cut counterfeit an an-
swer. And where no counterfeit answer is is produced,
produced, what is is
problematical
problematical becomes merely questionable. The question
merely questionable. question-
able
able then appears
appears as something uncertain, weak,
something uncertain, weak, and frag frag-
ile,
ile, something
something that is is threatening to
threatening to fall fall apart.
apart. We now
need some assurance that will put everything
will put everything together
together
again
again in comprehensible
comprehensible security.
security. This reassuring
reassuring combi-
combi-
PAET II
PAl\T 223
215
nation is
nation is the system,
system, a&mpa. The systematic and and system-
building
building way of forming
forming ideas through concepts takes
control.
control.
Concept
Concept and system
system alike areare alien to
to Greek thinking.
Greek thinking,
thinking, therefore,
therefore, remains of of aa fundamr.nta1ly
different kind from the more modern ways of of thinking 01of
Kierkegaard
Kierkegaard and Nietzsche who, to be
who, to be sure, think in
in opposi-
tion to the system,
system^ but for
for that
that very reason remain the the
system's
system's captives.
captives. By
By way
way of Hegelian metaphysics, Kierke-
gaard
gaard remains everywhere
everywhere philosophically entangled, on on
the one hand in a dogmatic
dogmatic Aristotelianism that is is com-
pletely
pletely on a par
par with medieval scholasticism, and and onon the
the
other in the subjectivity
subjectivity of German idealism. No discerning
mind would denydeny the stimuli produced
produced byby Kierkegaard's
thought
thought that prompted
prompted us to to give
give renewed attention to the
to the
"existential." But about thethe decisive question-the
decisive question- the essen-
tial
tial nature of Being-Kierkegaard nothing whatever 10
Being Kierkegaard has nothing to
say.
say.
But we must here give give attention to another
another matter,
matter. The
interpretation
interpretation of Greek thinking that is
thinking that is guided
guided byby modem
conceptual
conceptual thinking
thinking not only inappropriate for
only remains inappropriate for
Greek thinking;
thinking it
5
it also
also keeps
keeps us from hearing
hearing thethe appeal ofof
the problematic
problematic of Greek thinking,
thinMngy and thus thus from being
held toto a constantly
constantly more urgent
1
urgent summons
summoiis to go on ques-
to go
1
tioning.
tioning. WeWe must not fail, fail, of course,
course, toto reflect
reflect on why
why and
in what way
way itit was precisely
precisely the thinking
thinking of of the
the Greeks that
essentially prepared the development
essentially prepared development of thmMng thinking in in the
sense of fonning
forming conceptual
conceptual ideas; indeed, Greek thinking
ideas 5 indeed,
was bound to to suggest development. But on the path
suggest that development.
which we are following
f ollowiiig here, thing for
important thing
here, the important for us is
is
first
first to see that
that our modern way of representational
way of representational ideas,
ideas,
as
as long
long asas it
it stubbornly
stubbornly holds to to its
its way,
way, blocks its own
blocks its
access to the begimring
access to begmiung and thus to to the
the fundamental charac-
charac
teristic
teristic of
of Western thinking. translations alone make
thinking. The translations
this
this point
point clear
dear ::
We now translate
We translate
214
214 W ll AT IS
1$ CALLED T Jt G ?
. . /'
with
"Useful is:is: the
the letting-lie-before-us so
so (the) taking-
ff
to-heo.art too
t0o . . . "
. . *
But Al')'W' and voeiJf is is useful not just in in general and by by

and large, as as though we were dealing merely with an invi-
tation to be attentive whenever we fonn ideas, as as though
tite saying, expressed in
the in terms of the usual translation, in-
of the in
tended to to say:
say it
: is necessary that we think. On the
it is the con-
trary, the saying is is leading toward the the first flash ofof dawn of
the nature of of thinking.
But what, in in turn,
turn, determines that nature? What else
but to which AE-yEW
"but that to X^yet? and VOEiv
FOCIF refer?
refer? And thatthat isis identi-
identl-
fied in the word immediately following.following. The word is Mv.
is iov.
"EEv
*HkJr is
is translated as as "being." Later, the
**being." Later, the word is is merely
merely ok o•.
The epsilon disappears,
disappears, but this epsilon is
this vowel epsilon is precisely
precisely
what gives the root of the word: word e,:£, 1$, EUTW, e$t
E<;, lony, "is." We
est, "is," 9
d0 not translate Mv
do i^r with "the being" because
being" because there there is is no
article. Hie
The lack of the article further increases
article further increases thethe strange-
strange-
"Mr specifies That by
ness. "EEv by which the the letting-lie-bef
letting-lie-before-us
ore-us
taking-to-heart are
and the taking-to-heart are engaged.
engaged.
'EOv, being--the
*EOF being
? translation is
the translation is once again
again just
just as
as correct
correct
according to the dictionary
according dictionary as the translation
as the translation of AEYE'v with
of XlyciF
"telling." And we understand the translation^
"telling." translation, "being/'
"being,"
least difficulty
without the least difficulty-at least as
at least as long
long as as our
our ideas
ideas
and our views remain imque$tionifflg
unquestioning,7 average^
average, common.

Summcery Transition
The title
title of
of this
this lecture
lecture course
course isis aa question.
question. The question
question
runs : What is
runs: is called
called thinking?
thinking? As As aa course
course of of lectures,
lectures,
we expect
expect it
it to question. As the course
to answer the question. course proceeds,
proceeds,
then, it would mate
then, it make the title
title disappear
disappear bitbit by
by bit.
bit. But
But the
the
title of
title of our lecture
lecture course
course remains
remains-because
because itit is
is intended
intended
PAET
PART II
II
as itit sounds.
as It
sounds. It
remains the title of of the entire course. That
course remains
course one single question : \\'hatisis Itit that calls 0a
remains one : on
us to
us think? What
to think? What isis That
That which calls us us into thinking?
By the
By way we
the way have chosen, we
we have we are
are trying toto trace the
the
call by
call by which
which Western-European
\Vestem-European thinking isis summoned
and directed
and directed to
to that
that which
which is is consummated as as thinking.
We
\V e are
are trying
trying to
to hear
hear the for which we
the call for we ask, inm aa
saying of
saying of Parmenides
Parmenides that that says
says : :
TO Aeynv T'E voav TE"

"Useful is
"Useful is the
the XeyeF so also
A.€-ya.JJ so also the J'OE&v."
the vmZvJ*
Later on
Later on,7 with
with Plato
Plato and
and AristotlCy the two terms signify
Aristotle, the
--each by itself
each by itself-what subsequent philosophy understands
what subsequent
by thinking.
by thinking.
But if
But if we,
we, following
following the later later tradition,
tradition, translate
and FO>
and voEiv in
in Parmenides'
Parmenides' sayingsaying straight
straight away
away into "think-
ing," get in the way of
ing/* we then get in the way of our
purpose. For we are
own purpose.
after all trying
after all trying first
first toto detect
detect in in that
that saying
saying to what funda-
mental
mental traits
traits of
of its
its own essential
essential nature thinking is is called.
This
This isis why translate A.iyEw
why we translate literally with
Xeyco^ literally with: letting-lie-
:
before-us,
before-us, and POE'iv,
voeiv, on the other hand, hand, with
with: taking-to-
:
heart.
heart. Both belong
belong to to one single
single mutual conjunction.
conjunction. But
even
even this
this conjunction
conjunction does not yet yet distinguish
distinguish the funda-
mental
mental character
character of of thinking.
thinking.
The conjunction
The conjunction in in its
its turn
turn requires
requires the determination
by
by that
that to
to which
which it complies. What is
it complies. is that? Quite
Quite dearly
That
That to which >..£-yEw
to which Xeyco> and vwSw refer.
and POE'iv refer. TheThe saying nomesft
saying names it
in the
in the word
word that
that immediately
immediately follows.
follows. That word
That word is: EIW.
is
: Jfi*.
The
The translation,
translation correct
correct byby the
the dictionary,
dictionary, is: is: being.
being. Every-
Every
body and large and for
for
body understands
understands the the word,
word, at at least
least byby and large and
everyday word is in everyday
spoken in
everyday use,
use, if
if indeed
indeed thethe word is ever
ever spoken everyday
language.
language.
LECTURE
LECTURE
X
X
·-·
If
if we were to to examine what everyraan
everyman has in in mind each
"
bcing we would gather
Ai
time he hears or repeats
repeats the word "being," ?
gather
infonnation. We would have
most varied and most curious information.
to face up
up to
to a strange
strange confusion, probably to
confusion, and probably to recognize
recognize
that the notorious chaos of the state state of of the world todaytoday
itself even in such inconspicuous
expresses itself inconspicuous fields fields as
as the
range
range of meanings
meanings this word seems to to have. In fact?fact, that
chaos may even have its
may 'even its roots here. But a stillstill greater
greater puzzle
puzzle
is
is that men nonetheless understand each other. other. All things
things
denominator, which then nomi
are reduced to aa common denominator, nomi-
nates for us what is is so commonly
commonly understood by by a "being."
"being."
We
We are always
always able to point directly, "by
point out directly 7
by all
all kinds ofof
simple
simple indications,
indications, what the word **being" "being" means. We
point mountains, the sea,
point to the mountains., forest, the horse,
sea, the forest, horse, the
ship, the sky,
ship, God, the contest,
sky, God, assembly. And
people's assembly.
contest, the people's
those indications are correct.
then, how is
But then ?
is anyone
anyone to understand what is is the use
use of
of
a Greek saying says: "Useful
saying that says: "Useful is is the letting-lie-before-
letting-lie-before-
us . . .,"
. , " of what lies lies before us. .Akya;v, the
us . Aeyeur, the letting-lie*
letting-lie-
before-us, becomes just
before-us, just as superfluous
superfluous as as the
the vo&v
vOEI.v which
follows. For mortal men perceive perceive automatically
automatically and con con-
stantly
stantly what lieslies before them. As they they move on the land
they
they observe the mountains,
mountains, and as as they
they sail,
sail, the sea.
sea. They
They
216
PART II
PART 217
observe the signs

signs in the sky,
sky, and are are attentive to the signs
to the
given by
given by God. They observe each other other in the contest. They
in the
watch each other at the feast feast and in in die
the popular assembly.
The letting-lie-before-us,
letting-lie-before-us, and the the observing
observing of the Mv,
of the *,
hap-
pen
pen by by themselves,
themselves, simply
simply because such living living beings as as
exist. Men do not first
men exist. first need a a special
special summons to to
Akye:v
XeyaF and JIOELJI.
FOCIF. Nor do they
they know anything
anything about it,it.
And yet yet the saying
saying speaks
speaks out and says says: "XP'l--Useful
"xpi}
: Useful
is
is the letting-lie-before-us
letting-lie-bef ore-ns so (the) taMng-to-heart
so (the) taking-to-heart too: too:
UJJI,
cor, being."
being." However,
However, the saying does not
saying does not end with lov.
with lor.
The last
last word in thethe saying
saying is is given to'
given to the
the last
last word that
the saying
saying says Jw EJLf.L£1'!2'.
says : EOJI
:
c/iftow. The infinitive
infinitive ippGw is,y like
lp.p.&cu is like
co7te>cu, an older form for
ECTJL&aL, for Eiva.i.,
dim, and meansmeans: to
; be.
to be*
"Useful is:
is letting-lie-before-us
letting-lie-before-us and so
: so (the)
(the) taMng-to-*
taking-to-
heart too
too : being
being : to
: to be."
be."
:
What are we talking

talking about when we now use use these
these
terms? WeWe are dealing
dealing with them as as if
if they
they were empty
empty
shells.
shells. "Being"
"Being" and "to be" are almost no more than empty empty
sounds. WeWe have,
have, besides,
besides, some historical
historical knowledge
knowledge that
that
philosophy
philosophy from of old uses these these words to to identify
identify the
the
theme with which it it struggles. We are in in a peculiar
peculiar
struggles.
position.
position.
On the one hand,
hand, the words "being""being" and "to be" say say
nothing
nothing graspable.
graspable. On the other hand hand,7 they
they are
are the highest
highest
rubrics of philosophy.
philosophy. But these same rubrics,rubrics, when used
with emphasis,
emphasis, strike
strike us as
as alien substances in in the
the language,
language.
They
They disturb the harmonious and artless artless progress
progress ofof natural
natural
speech.
speech. Ultimately,
Ultimately, there is is a chill these terms. We
chill around three We
quite know where the chill
do not quite from-whether
chill comes from whether itit
comes from what theythey indicate,
indicate, or from the the frozen,
frozen, spectral
spectral
manner in which theythey haunt all philosophical discourse
all philosophical discourse and
writing. AH this
writing. All this will
wiU cause misery
misery toto a man who is is honest
himself, who will
with himself, will not letlet himself be confused by all
by all
the uproar
uproar about Being
Bring and Existence.
218
SIS WHAT
WHAT IS CALL&D THINKING?
THINKING?
With such miserable means as as the

the vaporous and and empty
terms "being" and "to "to be/be," how can
1
can we meet the the demands
of the
of the translation of of Pannenides' saying, specifically the the
translation of of Ms
his fmal words on which everything clearly
depends?
The final words are l.ov : l/ipcm**
are 14* : Ef£P£"Ct£. The saying is is to
to tell
tell us
what it it is
is that calls mortals to to thinking, by by involving and
directing them into the the fundamental elements of thinking,
into tine
the conjunction of of Alycii*
Xe"fELV and WCIF.VOE'iv. But forfor the moment
we hear only this much in in the
the saying,
saying, that XcyciF WF
XeyELV and voe'iJI
in their tum refer
in refer to to Uv: lp.p.EVCU. TSoF
e5r 3/ificyaft.
; lp.JL&o.t is,
'E6v: ipjuvcu,
: is, so
so to
to
speak, thethe object of of their
their reference.
reference. Is Is it
it mere accident
accident that
XiyEw and voe'iv
Xeyiv wow have come upon upon thisthis object
object which is is no
object?
object? Probably
Probably not. not. For the the first
first word of of the
the saying
saying says says
xprj: "It
Xprj: "It is useful . . .."
is useful . . "
But why,
why, and in in what way, way, do do letting-Iie-bef
ore-us and
taking-to-heart
taMng-to-heart refer refer to to l.ov lp.fUJ'o.L, to
lor fftjxcrai, to "being,"
"being," to to "to
be"?
he"? The reference
reference is useful. To whom or what is
is useful. is this
this ref
ref-
useful, of Xi-yEw
erence useful, Xlyea> and voeiw voe'iv to wv eppt&ai?
to eor EJLfUVO.'? Does
c'being,
4t
being," .. does
does "to be" have use for for the letting-Iie-before~us
and the taking-to-heart?
taking-to-heart?
Being
Being can be, be, can it it not,
not, without there being being men who
take itit to
to heart? For a long long time now, talk has gone
now, talk gone around
that
that being
being is is ..
"inin itself."
itself." Is Is such talk,talk, too,
too, "in itself"?
itself"? Or
is
is it,
it, together
together with its its thought content,
thought content, subject subject to to a call?
Does the call call which calls
calls us into thinking
thinking issue from being, being,
or from
from Being,
Being, or from
from both,
both, or from neither? Is
Is the i<J.,
ear
Ep.Jl£V(U,
f&ftF<u, contrary
contrary to appearances,
appearances, more than )ust just the object
object
for XeyctP and VOEI:v?
for Xi-yEw FOCO*? Is Is wv EJoLJL&ru.,
COP ipp&ai, is is "being," is
"being," is "to be"
perhaps
perhaps much rather rather the subject which draws all
the subject Xeyeo' and
all XeyEw
Wo> to
VOEi'v to itself,
itself, refers
refers it it to
to itself-and
itself and does so so of necessity?
necessity?
However,
However, when we we are talking
talking here of "object""object" and "sub- "sub
ject,"
ject," we we are using
using only only the crudest makeshift to to indicate
the relation
relation which
which is now emerging
is now
emerging in the distance.
distance.
To gain
To gain clarity,
clarity^ toto be
be able
able merely
merely to to ask
ask the proper
proper ques-ques-
PART
PARTIIII 219
tions inthe
tionsin matter,we
thematter, we mustsurely
must firstmake
surelyfirst makeclear
clear what
theGreek
the Greekwords €ovand
words lov andIjLîom signify.What
Ep.p.EVa£signify. Whatthey
they indi-
catepresumably
cate presumablybelongs
belongstogether.
together.Even linguistically,"be-
Evenlinguistically, "be-
ing" and "to be" are no more
ing" and "to be" are no
morethanthan different
differentforms
forms ofofthe
the
word. They
sameword.
same Theydesignate,
designate,so soititseems,
seems,the
thesame thing.
samething*
We can
We can stress
stress and
and specify
specify that
thatthethetwo
two words
wordsbelong
belongto to-
gether, and stillnot
and still notbe
be able
able to
to think properlywhat
thinkproperly whatisisdesig
desig-
gether,
natedby
nated by the
the words. Indeed, we
words. Indeed, wemust
must give
give particular
particular atten
atten-
tion to
tion the manner
to the manner in inwhich
which they
theybelong
belongtogether,
together, ififwe
we are
are
to hear
to hear Parmenides'
Parmenides' saying
saying at
at all in the
all in the proper
proper way.
way.
Fortunately, Parmenides
Fortunately, Parmenides himself, by Ms
himself, by his manner
manner of of stat-
stat-
ing, gives us
us aa hint
hint which
which helps us to
helps us to bring
bring out the manner
out the manner
jpag^ gives 1
in which
in €ov and
which coi/ and Z/ifo*, "being" and
EJLJLB'ai., "being" and "to be," belong
"to be/
together.
together.
For Parmenides
For Parmenides elsewhere
elsewhere frequently
frequently uses
uses the W
the word E6J,
for Ep.f.W'CU,
for EivtU. At first
ippoxu, AVOL. first glance,
glance, and especially
especially in the light
in the light
of
of the
the saying
saying
we are
are discussing, strange. But
discussing, that seems strange. But in
in
substance, that usage has good
substance, that usage good grounds, as good
grounds, as good as
as anything
can have. If
can have. If we substitute
substitute the usage just mentioned, a>F, for
usage just
for aw,
lp.p.EVm, the
the saying
saying runs
runs : :
''x.pT] ro A.lyEw TE voov

"XP?? TO Xeyo> re
vodv r· eav iov.
r&>v lav."''
According to the wording, the same thing
the same thing is now said
is now saM twice
twice
According to the wording,
_
-and and thus
thus nothing
nothing at at all
all is
is said. That is,
said. That unless the same
is, unless the same
word Eov
word ifo says different things in in the
the first and the
first and second
the second
says different things
place. And so itit does.
does. This is possible and the
one and the
possible only
only if
This is if one
place. And so
But does not
does not
same word, Mv,
same word, has two
o*>, has
two different
different meanings.
meanings. But
every word have more than than one one meaning?
meaning? Doubtless.
Doubtless. The The
every word have more
multiple meanings of of the word E6v,
the word &Sr, however,
however, are neither
are neither
multiple meanings
accidental
accidental nor norvague. word has two meanings
vague. Rather,
Rather, the the word has two meanings
in
inaaspecific and distinctive
specific and
distinctivesense.
sense.
AA grammatical reflection
reflection isis needed
needed to make the
to make the point
pomt
grammatical of
clear. extentof
theextent
clear.What
Whatreservations
reservationstherethereare aroconcerning
conce3mngthe
its
itsvalidity will become obvious
validity will become
obviousin inwhat
whatfollows.
follows.
andspeaks
The word"being,"
Theword "being,"by byitsits structure, soundsand
structure, sounds speaka
like
like the
the tenns "blossoming," "gleaming," "resting," "resting," "ach-
ing," and so so on.
eta. The grammatical name of of long standing
for words so so fonned is is participle. They They participate, they
take part-in two meanings. But the the essential point is is not
that there are are only two meanings, instead of of three or or four,
four,
but that thethe two meanings refer to to each other. Each of of the
the
two meanings is is one of of the
the pair.
pair. The word "blossoming"
"blossoming"
can
eaa mean : the the given something that is is blossoming--the the
rosebush or or apple tree. If If the
the word is is intended in in this
this sense
sense,?
it
it designates what stands in bloom. "Blossoming"
in "bloom. "Blossoming" desig- desig-
nates the
the given something that is is blossoming,
blossoming, and intends intends
this something by by itself
itself as that to
as that to which blossoming
blossoming is is
fitting and proper.
proper. The word "blossoming,"
"blossoming/ if
1
if it
it means,
means, for for
instance,
instance^ thethe rose, here almost represents
rose, here represents the the proper
proper name
for
for what it it designates. In its
designates. linguistic form,
its linguistic fonn, it it has the the
character
character of of aa substantive,
substantive, a a noun. "Blossoming," so
no<un. "Blossoming," so under
under-
stood,
stood, is used as
is used as a noun.
But blossoming
blossoming may may alsoalso mean "the act act of
of blossoming,"
blossoming,"
in contrast with "the act
in contrast act of wilting." What is
of wilting." is meant is is not
the given
given plant
plant that happens
happens to to be blossoming
blossoming or wilting,wilting,
"blossoming, wilting."
but "blossoming, wilting." Here "blossoming"
"blossoming" is is used in its its
verbal
verbal sense.
sense.
Participles
Participles take part part in
in both thethe nominal and the the verbal
verbal
meaning.
meaning. This is is something we learn
something learn in in grammar
grammar school. school.
We do not give
We give it
it much thought. But at
thought. at this
this time,
time, and in in
this
this place,
place, itit is
is no longer sufficient
longer sufficient to to point
point out
out that
that partici
partici-
ples
ples have two meanings-as
meanings as though though all all we had to to do were
to classify
classify the word in question, Eov, being,
question, Joy, being, asas a participle.
participle.
That classification
classification is is correct, of
correct, of course,
course, if if we areare content
content
with grammar
grammar and with the fact that such words happen
fact that happen
to exist
exist in this
this linguistic
linguistic form. Blossoming,
Blossoming, that that is is some
some-
thing blossoming and the act
thing blossoming of blossoming;
act of blossoming; flowing,
flowing, that that
is
is something flowing and the act
something flowing act of
of flowing,
flowing, and accord accord-
ingly,
ingly, then,
then, "being"
"being" means something
something in in being,
being, and the the
act
act of being.
being.
PART II
PART II 221
But meanings? Is
But whywhy do do participles
participles havehave two meanings? Is it
it because
they
they take part part in two two meanings?
meanings? No, N07 rather
rather these words
are participles
participles because what they they state
state is is always applied to
always to
what is in itself twofold. Blossoming
what is in itself twofold. Blossoming in in its
its meaning as as a a
noun designates
designates aa being being that is is blossoming. Blossoming in
blossoming. in
its
its meaning as a verb
meaning verb designates
designates "to "to be be in
in bloom."
bloom." ·when
the word is is used in its its nominal meaning, "something blos-
meaning, "something
soming,"
soming," it
it is
is no
no longer
longer specifically stated
specifically stated that
that this
this some-
thing
thing is, is, of course,
course, a being;being and no more
5 mo-re does
does the
the word "to "to
1'
be"
be fmd expression
find expression when the word "blossoming" "blossoming" is is used asas
a verb. What is is the upshot of
upshot of all all this?
this?
participle £6v,
The participle lov, being,
being, is just one more participle
not just
is not
participle
among
among countless others;
others $
Iw
£6v ens, being
77 ens, being is
is the
the participle
which gathers
gathers all other possible
all participles into
possible participles into itself.
itself. The
dual meaning
meaning of participles
participles stemssteins from the the duality
duality of of what
they
they tacitly
tacitly designate.
designate. But this dualism in
this dualism in itsits turn
turn stems
from a distinctive
distinctive duality
duality that
that is is concealed
concealed in the word a%
in the Uw,
being. One might
being. might suppose
suppose that participles
participles like like blossoming,
blossoming,
sounding,
sounding, flowing,
flowing, aching concrete, wMe
aching are concrete, while the the participle
participle
£6v, being, is
cw, being, is always
always abstract.
abstract. The opposite
opposite is is true.
true.
The participle
participle in which all rest have their
all the rest their roots
roots,? in
in
which they they grow together (concrescere),
grow together (conerescere) and from which
,
they continuously
they continuously grow, though without specifically
grow, though specifically ex ex-
pressing
pressing it, it, is
is that
that participle
participle which speaks speaks from aa unique unique
therefore distinctive
and therefore distinctive duality.
duality. In In keeping
keeping with that that dual
dual
nature, a being
nature, being has its its being
being in Being, and Being
in Being, Being persists
persists
as Being of
as the Being of aa being.
being. There does does not existexist another kiad kind
twofoldness
of twof oldness thatthat can compare
compare with with this.
this.
"Participle" is
"Participle" is aa grammatical
grammatical term. term. WhatWhat it refers to
it refers to,?
fundamentally though
fundamentally though not explicitly,
explicitly, is is that
that duality
duality which,
which,.
linguistically and grammatically,
linguistically grammatically, by by way
way of of the
the words AJr, u,
ov, being, is
ens, being,
&>, ens, is counted as as apparently
apparently one one among
among ail all the
the
other participles.
other participles. The grammarians
grammarians of ancient Rome took
of ancieptt took
their terms
their terms for for the the various
various word forms from the the Greek
Greek
grammarians. The investigations
grammarians. investigations of of thethe Greek grammar-
Greek grammar-
222 WHAT
WHAT IS THINKING?
CAE,f*B THINKING?
IS CALLED
ians were based on 0B those designations of Of language that

resulted from the the reflections of of logic on <k0yw XJCT,
And those reflections of logic^ in
of logic, in their turn,
turn, go go back to to the
philosophy of Plato and Aristotle.
Thus,
Thus, our current distinction between nouns and action action
words, substantives and verbs, does not arise from gram- gram-
mar. Nor does it it come out of logic textbooks. It
It comes to
light for
for the first time, deliberately and laboriously, laboriously^ in one
of the most profound dialogues Plato Plato has left left us,us, thethe
"Sophist."
"S0phist." The Latin term participium participium is is the
the translation
translation of
the Greek p.erox:r].
i&erx*l* TheTh e taking part part of of something
something in in some-
thing isis called pjerfysu*. This word is is fundamental to to Plato's
Plato's
thinking. It It designates the participation of
designates participation of any any given being
given bring
in that through
through which it--say, it this table
say, this table--showsshows its its face
face
and form (in Greek, iSla
(in Greek, iSIa or E!&!>)
eXSas) as being. In this
this being.
as this this
appearance
appearance it it is
is in present
present being,
being, it is. According
it is. According to to Plato,
Plato,
constitutes the Being
the idea constitutes Being of a being.being. The idea idea is is the
the
face whereby
whereby a given given something
something shows its its form,
form, looks
looks at at us,
us,
and thus appears,
appears, for instance,
instance, as this table.
as this table. In this form,
this form,
the
the thing
tiling looks at us. us.
Now Plato designates relation of
designates the relation of aa given
given being
being to to its
its
idea as pM0*i$, participation.
idea participation. But this this participation
participation of of the
the
one, the being,
one, the being, in in the
the other,
other, the Being,
Being, already
already presupposes
presupposes
that the duality
that duality of beingbeing and BeingBeing doesdoes exist.
exist. Me^cf19, the the
participation of beings
participation beings in in Being,
Being, consists
consists in in what the the
fl.ETox:fJ, the participle
pervxtiy participle ew, ov,
l6v, OF, designates
designates grammatically.
grammatically.
Aristotle's statement cited
In Aristotle's earlier, we learned
cited earlier, learned thatthat the
the
persistent question
persistent question of thinking
thinking is: TL TO
is: ri TO &* ov---what
what is is the
the
particular being
particular being in in its
its Being?
Being? The strugglestruggle to to answer this this
unique question
unique question determines the the fundamental character character of of
the history
the history of philosophy.
philosophy.
Western-European thinking,
Western-European thinking, in in keeping
keeping with with thethe guid
guid-
ing question
ing question ri T£ TO ov,
ro w, what isis the the particular
particular being being in in itsits
Being?, proceeds
Being?, proceeds from beings beings to to Being. Thinking ascends
Being. Thinking ascends
from thethe former to to the latter.
latter. In keeping with
In keeping with the
the guiding
guiding
PAl'lT ii
I[ 22:5
225
question,
question, thinking transcends the the particular being, ia in the
direction of of its
its Being, not In in order to to leave behind and
abandon the
abandon the particular being, but but soso that by by this a:;cent,
this transcendence,
this transcendence, it it may represent the the particular being ia in
that which
that which it,it, as
as aa being,
being, is.is.
What of itself
itself lies
lies before ms the particular being, is
us, the
f
is to
to
the Greeks that
the that which arises of of itself ,
thus can
can
be called
be called the "physical." THs
the "physical." This word is is taken broadly here,
include the
to include
to the psychic
psychic and the the spiritual as as well. The guiding
question-what
question what is being, what is
is being, is the
the physical in in the
the widest
sense?-goes
sense? beyond the
goes beyond the particular being. "Going beyond
one thing
one thing to to another"
another" is in Greek p.enJ.. Thinking in
is in in the
the
sense of
sense of the question Tn TO
the question TO wov--what
what is is the particular being
in respect
in respect of of its
its Being?
Being?-thus thus takes a a peculiar turn under
the name "metaphysics."
the "metaphysics." The thematic sphere of of Western
metaphysics is
metaphysics indicated by
is indicated pi8Eg,f!:, the
by fi^feîg, the particular being's
participation in Being; so that the question is
participation in Being so that the
,
is now how the
participating being can be defined in
participating being in terms of Being. This
sphere
sphere of
of metaphysics
metaphysics is is grounded
grounded in p.eroXJi, what the
in what pn>xi), the
unique participle E6v
unique participle eov designates
designates with a single word: the
the
duality
duality of
of individual
individual beingsbeings and Being.
Being. But in order that
metaphysical
metaphysical thinking
thinking may may first
first of all all discern itsits own
sphere,
sphere,
and attempt
attempt its its first
first steps
steps in that sphere,
sphere^
" XPTJ' TO' II.E')'ELJI
\, , ,EOV,, EOV
FO&> 'TT'CO?
TE VOEl.V
3, ,,
IDF
"X/w? Xeyeo' re
"It is useful
"It is useful to
to let-lie-before-us
let-lie-before-us and so the taking-to-
taMng-to-
heart
heart also
also : beings
beings in being."
:
being."
The duality
duality ofof individual beings and Being
individual beings Being must first lielie
before
before us
us openly,
openly, be taken to to heart and there kept
kept safely,
safely,
before
before it
it can
can be
be conceived
conceived and
and dealt
dealt with in the sense
sense of the
of the
participation of the one, aa particular
participation of the one, particular being,
bring, in the
the other,
other,
Being.
Being.
What
What isis the
the call
call that
that speaks to us from
speaks to from Parmenides' say-say
ing? "Let lie before you, and
ing? "Let lie before you, hearty EOV
and take to heart,
beings
beings in
in being!"
being!"
224 WHAT
W H AT IS CALL E D THINEING?
CALLED T H I N K I N G "!
In terms of
of grammar later 0n on, and thus seen from the
7
the
outside, Parmenides' saying says: sajs take to
'
to heart I0FMv asas parti-
parti-
ciple, and with itit take heed of in i6v, the
of Ef'+'fl'a.l. In the Being of
beings. However, no further inquiry and thought is is given
Ac duality itself, of beings and Being, neither to
to the to the
nature ofof the
the duality nor to to that nature's origin. origin. The
duality emerges only up up to
to the
the point where the ^fi/wot lp.JW!ru. of
Mv, the
the Being ofof beings, can be taken to to heart. Thus it it is
is
that the
the one thing which remains to be asked-what what areare
particular beings in in their Being
Being??-comes
-comes to to the
the fore
fore within
the
the sphere of
of this duality.
duality. The style
style of of all
all Western-Euro-
'\Vestem-Euro-
pean philosophy-and and there
there is other, neither
is no other, neither aa Chinese
nor an Indian
Indian philosophy-is
philosophy is determined by by this
this duality
duality
"beings-in
"beings* in being."
being." Philosophy's procedure in
Philosophy's procedure in the
the sphere
sphere
of
of this duality
duality isis decisively
decisively shaped
shaped by by the
the interpretation
interpretation
Plato
Plato gave
gae to
to the
the duality.
duality. That the the duality
duality appears
appears as as par
par-
ticipation
ticipation does not atat all
all go
go without saying.
saying.
In order that a Western-European metaphysics can arise,
Western-European metaphysics arise,
in order that a meta-physical
meta-physical thinking
thinking can become the mis mis-
sion and historic
historic fate
fate of mortal man,man, is is necessary
necessary before all all
else
else that a call
call summon us into AEYEW re
the \&ycur
into the voliv TCOV
TE voeiv T,&v
EPfl£VO.'.
Accordingly-what
Accordingly what is is called "thinking," insofar
called "thinking/ insofar as
7
as it
it
follows
follows this
this call?
call? Thinking letting-lie-before-us
Thinking means: letting-lie-before-us
and so taking-to-heart
taking-to-heart also:
also beings
beings in
: in being.
being. Thinking
Thinking so so
structured pervades
pervades the foundation of of metaphysics,
metaphysics, the the
duality
duality of beings
beings and Being. thinking develops
Being. Such thinking develops itsits
positions on this
various successive positions this foundation,
foundation, and deter deter-
mines the fundamental positions
positions ofof metaphysics.
metaphysics.
Does the saying,
saying, then,
then, provide
provide usus with an answer after after
all
all to
to the question
question what is is to understood by
to be understood by thinking?
thinking?
No. If we hear itit rightly,
rightly, it it only helps us
only helps us to
to question.
question. The
saying,
saying, however,
however, does tell
tell us
us what will
will be useful
useful to
to us
us-this
this
simple AE'YEUf
humble and simple \&y&p TE re voliv T'E!Jv EJLJW!a.i.
voeiv reap /z/zewi.
The appropriate
appropriate translation of
of the
the saying must therefore
saying therefore
PART
PAI\T II
If 225
25
run: "Useful to
run : to let-lie-before*us
let-lie-before-us so
so (the) taking-to-heart
also : beings in
: in being."
being."
This translation
translation makes clear how the relation of of the
the
infinitive lp.p.axu to
infinitive Ifyxcpot to the
the participle io? E6v is to be understood.
does that
But does that alone
alone give
give usus the
the needed clarity about what
"being," "in being/'
"being," being," and "to "to be" designate? Clearly not not.
Yet the
the terms "being"
"being" and "to
*l
to be" have long since
played the
played the role
role of decisive rubrics
of decisive rubrics inin the
the conceptual lan-
guage
guage of philosophy. The much-vaunted philosophia peren-
of philosophy.
nis, which is
ray, to outlast
is to outlast thethe centuries,
centuries, would crumble in in its
its
foundations if if the language
language of of these rubrics were taken
away
away from it. it. If
If we stop
stop forfor a moment and attempt1 directly
and precisely
precisely and without
without subterfuge,
subterfuge, to to represent in in our
minds what the the terms "being"
"being" and "to "to be" state, we find
such an examination
that such
that examination has has nothing
nothing toto hold onto.
onto. All
All our
ideas
ideas slip away and dissolve
slip away dissolve in in vagueness.
vagueness. Not entirely,
though,
though, because there always echoes, dark and confused,
always echoes,
something
something of the kind that is is vouchsafed to to our opinions
propositions. If
and propositions. If it otherwise, we could never in
it were otherwise,
any
any way
way understand what we nonetheless nonetheless constantly
constantly repeat
at
at present:
present "This summer is
: is hot."
hot,"
Let us imagine
imagine in thought
thought once again again and once more that
this
this inconspicuous
inconspicuous little little "is" could
could not be thought,
thought. What
would become of our stay stay in world, if
in the world, if this
this firm and
constantly affirmed "is" were
constantly a:ffinned ware denied us?
And yet,
yet, toto make clear
dear what "to be" says says we need onlyonly
point
point to
to some being--a
being a mountain,
mountain, a house lying lying before us,
us,
a tree
tree standing
standing there.
there. What do we point point out when we help help
ourselves
ourselves by indications? We indicate a being,
by such indications? being, of
course;
course but strictly rest on
strictly speaking
speaking the indication comes to to rest
j
the
the mountain,
mountain, the house, house, the tree. tree. Now we imagineimagine that
we have the the answer to to precisely
precisely what is is still
still in question.
question.
For we do do not, after all,
not, after all, inquire
inquire about a being
being as mountain,
mountain,
as
as house,
house, as tree, as
as tree, as though
though we wanted to to climb a mountain,
mountain,
move into
into a a house,
house, or or plant
plant a tree. We inquire
tree. We inquire about the the
226 WHAT CALX.XB THINKING?
mountain, about the the house, about the the tree asas aa given being,
in
in order to 10 give thought to to the
the being of of the mountain, the
being of the house, the being of the the tree.
We notice at at once, itIt is
is true, that being Is is not
not attached
to
to the
the mountain somewhere, or or stuck to to the
the house, or hang hang-
ing
ing from the We notice, thus, the
the tree. vVe the problematic that is is
designated with "being."
"being/' Our question therefore becomes
"becomes
more questioning. ·we We letlet beings, as as beings, lie lie before
before us
and give our heart and mind to to the "being" of
the "being" of particular
particular
beings.
beings*
But so
so long asas that which the the words car E6v and l/i/i^po*
lp.p.€U(U state
state
dissolves in u be," we can-
in the
the vague
vague terms "beings"
"beings" and "to to be/' can-
not hear what the the saying
saying says.
says. For thesethese terms offer offer no
guarantee thatthat they
they carry
carry across
across to to us
us what the the Greek fiw 6or
Ef'IL&a.L
UfAfj^rn tells.
tells. The translation
translation is is still
still no translation
translation if if we
merely replace
replace thethe words iov EJLfUPa.L with our own
Jor and ^.pcma
"
terms "being"
"being" and "to "to be,"
be or the
5
the Latin
Latin ens
ens and esse. esse.
What then,
What, 7 then, is
is still
still missing in
missing in the traditional
traditional translation
translation
of the words E.Ov lor with "being"
*4
EJLfUPa.L with "to be"?
being" and Zftpaxu,
What is is missing
missing is that we did not
is that not try to say
try to say those
those words
over in the same way way asas we did the words XP XfJ'177? ^d AEyEtP
and X^yetr
and J."'EW, particles TE • • • re. What is
Fodi>7 and the particles . . . is still
still
needed? That we ourselves,
ourselves, instead of of merely
merely transposing
transposing
the Greek terms into terms of our language., language, passpass over into into
the Greek sphere
sphere of Mv cw and EJLp.£Vru., ov
lftjttFot OF and efvoi.
?
E!va.L. This pas pas-
sage is hard-not
sage is hard not in itself,itself only
only for
,
for us.
us. But it it is is not
not imim-
possible.
possible.
Summary
Transition
Parmenides' saying
saying moves toward thatthat which is is designated
designated
by
by the word E.Ov.
COF. This fact
fact becomes quite
quite clear
clear if, the
if on the ,
strength
strength of Parmenides' own usage usage, we replace
replace the
7
the final
final
!/4f&e>iu with iov.
word EJ.'JL£Va.L w. In grammatical terms, the
grammatical terms, the word isis
a participle.
participle. Reflection showed that iov is
that e&v is the
the participle
participle of
of
FAIT II
PAllT 227
22J
all participles. 'EOv

all participles. *Ear isis the
the unique and thus distinctive
f'ETO")(l}.
peroX*). It tells of the duality: beings in
It tells in being; bE-ing of of
individual beings.
individual beings. Instead of of the
the verbal signification, lan- lan
guage
guage also uses the infinitive
also uses the ElPa41 esse, to 10 be.
be.
The well-worn
The well-worn form of EOJI
form of ew,7 current in in the
the writing of of Plato
and Aristotle,
Aristotle, is is oJI,
fr, ro ov,
TD fr, beings in m being. All All ofof Western
metaphysics,
metaphysics, without suffering suffering the the least violence, could be be
placed
placed under the title: title To
: ov.
TO OF. IfIf we do so, so, we must meet one one
condition,
condition, however. From the outset, and constantly and and
exclusively,
exclusively., we must hear and read read thethe word .,.0 T& OJI
OF as
as the
the
distinctive
distinctive participle,
participle, even if if we do do not
not always make it It
explicit
explicit in philosophical
philosophical parlance.
parlance.
When we say say "Being,"
"Being/ it it means "Being of of beings:•
1
When we say say "beings,"

"beings/ it
7
it means "beings in in respeet of 01
Being."
Being." We We are always speaking within
always speaking within thethe duality. The
duality
duality is is always
always a priorprior datum,
datum, for for Parmenides as as much as as
for Plato,
Plato, Kant as much as Nietzsche. The duality has
as Nietzsche. has
developed
developed beforehand the sphere sphere within which the the relation
of beings
beings to BeingBeing becomes capable
capable of being mentally repre-
of being
sented. That relation can be interpreted interpreted and explained ia in
vanous
various ways.
ways.
An interpretation
interpretation decisive
decisive forfor Western thought is is that
given
given by by Plato. He says says that
that between beings beings and Being
prevails the x^P^f^y $
there prevails Tj x<P> *iss the focus,
locus, the site,
place. Plato means to
the place. to say
say: beings
: beings and Being
Being are are in
in dif
dif-
places. Particular
ferent places. Particular beings
beings and Being Being are differently
differently
located. Thus when Plato
located. Plato gives
gives thought
thought to to the
the different
different
location of beings
location beings and Being,
Being, he he isis asking
asking forfor the totally
totally
different place
different place ofof Being,
Being, asas against
against the placeplace ofof beings.
beings.
To make the the question
question of of the XMpwp&Sy ^ the difference m
e di^fj^rence in
placement of
placement of beings
beings and Being Being at at all
all possible,
possible, the distinc-
the distinc
tion-the
tion duality of
the duality of the
the two
two--must must be be given
given beforehand,
beforehand,
in such aa way
in way that
that this
this duality
duality itself
itself does
does not
not asas such
such receive
receive
specific attention.
specific attention.
The same is is true
true for
for all transcendence. When we
all transcendence. we pass
pass
228 WHAT
WHAT IS C A I* m, E THINKIHG?
CALLED THINKING?
from beings 10to Being, our passage passes through the dual dual-
ity of
ity of the two,
two. But thethe passage never first creates the
The duality is
duality. Hie is already In It Is
in use. It is the thing most
used, and thus most usual, inin all
all our all
our stating and ideas, in all
we do.
wedb*
If
If we hear the
the word e^F
EOv in
in its
its dual signification,
signification, by
by virtue
virtue
of its 017% we now can translate
its grammatical, participial form, translate
the saying more clearly
dearly : :
"Useful is
is the
the letting-lie-before-us,
letting-lie-before-us, so
so (the)
(the) taking-to-
taking-to-
heart, too
heart, too : beings
: in being."
beings in being."
But this, too, is
this, too, still not
Is still not a translation
translation ofof the final
final words
of the saying.
saying. We We have merely replaced the Greek words
merely replaced
others, with ens and esse or
with others, or with "being"
"being" and "to be."
But this
this replacement
replacement business
business doesdoes not lead
lead us anywhere.
anywhere.
If we are
If are to
to hear the saying,
saying, if if we are
are to
to be prompted
prompted by by it
it
to
to raise
raise questions,
questions, itit is
is not enough
enough to to exchange
1
exchange the Greek

words forfor other
other words in in other languages,
languages, however familfamil-
iar.
iar. Instead,
Instead, what is is needed is that we let
is that let the Greek words
tell
tell us directly
directly what they designate. We
they designate. We must transplant
transplant our
hearing
hearing to to where the telling
telling statement of the Greek lan lan-
guage
guage has its its domain.
domain..
LECTURE
LECTURE
XI
XI
.
._.
What does EOV e/z/xo/cu

does eov mean, thought
EfLJU11W. mean, thought in
in Greek?
Greek? This is the
This is
question at which we now arrive
question at arrive by
by waj
way of
of the
the question
"What isis called
called thinking?"
thinking?" How does it it happen that the
question
question about thinking thinking leads
leads usus to
to give
give thought
thought to to what
the Greeks may
the may mean when they they say Uv (being),
say !&> (being) , and
EfLJU"W. (to be) ??
jjLfjii>cLi (to be)
The question
question "What is is called thinking?"
thinking?" faced us at the
beginning
beginning of of our way,
way, in
in four modes.
What is is called
called thinking?
thinking? means most immediately
immediately and
first
first:: what does this word "thinking"
does this "thinking" signify?
signify? WeWe leamed
learned
that
that it it signifies memory, thanks, thinking that recalls.
signifies memory thanks, thinking
?
Since
Since then,then, we we have
have heard
heard no
no more of such matters along along
our
our way.
way.
What
What is is called
called thjnkjng?
thinking? means
means further
further andand second:
second:
what,
what, according
according to to the
the long
long traditional
traditional doctrine
doctrine of of thinking,
thinking,
logic, do we still
logic, do we
still today
today understand
understand by by thinking?
tMnMng? ThoughThough
no
no particulars were given on on the
the teachings
teachings of of logic, we
logic, we
particulars were given
noted
noted thatthat the
the name
name logic
logic corresponds
corresponds to what this
to what this doctrine
doctrine
understands
understands by by thinkjng.
thinking. Thinking
Thinking is Xyw, Xoyos in
is AE-yEU', the
in the
sense
sense of of proposition, that is, of
proposition, that is,
of judgment.
judgment. Judging
Judging is is
thought to be the activity of the the understanding

understanding in broad
the broad
in the
thought to be the activity of
sense
sense of of reason.
reason. The The perception back to
to
perception of of reason
reason traces
traces back
voliv.v. Parmenides' of
Parmenides* saying saying told
told usus about
about the
the judgment
judgment of
229
229
230
250 WHAT CALLED
WHAT IS CALL ED THINK.ING?
T H I NIt IN G ?
reason, about AiyEw

Xlyar in in connection with woiv VOEiv. The saying
deals neither with the the X^ry0s of of logic,
logic, nor with V\o;th the
the judg-
judg-
ments of reason, but only only with the the conjunction
conjunction of of \jtw
).iynv
and VOEiv.
FOC4F. The letting-lie-before-us
letting-lie-before-tis and (the) (the) taking-to-
taking-to-
heart emerge so so far
far only
only as the basic character
as the character of of what
subsequently is is called
called thinking
thinking and is is viewed in in terms of
logic.
logic.
Thus our attempt
attempt to to translate Parmenides' saying
translate Paroaenides* saying did did inin
aa certain sense yield
yield us an answer to to the
the second
second question.
question.
Accordingly,
Accordingly, what is is called
called thinking
thinking is, is, properly,
properly, letting-
letting-
lie-before-us
lie-before-us and so so taking-to-heart
taking-to-heart also. also. . . . But it
. . . it
turned out that
that this
this definition
definition of of thinking
thinking is is far
far from ade ade-
quate.
quate. Something
Something is is still
still lacking in
lacking in the the definition,
definition, and that that
something
something isis no less
less than the main thing, thing, that
that is,is, the
the indica
indica-
tion
tion of
of what XeyciF and voliv refer to.
vmiv refer to. Only
Only that that indication
indication
will allow us to
will adequately: What
to ask adequately: VVhat is is called
called thinking?
thinking?
And that
that to
to which the conjunction
conjunction of AE-yEW and vo&v
of Xeyeu' VOEI:v joins
joins
and conforms itselfitself is lOv lJ.LJL&W..
is the !oi> f&ftFca. And what cbv €6v
ipftP04 means,
lp.p£Vw. means, thought
thought in Greek terms, terms, is is the
the question
question at at
which we stop.
stop. This means that our seemingly seemingly wayward wayward
effort to make an appropriate
effort to appropriate translation
translation of of cwiav Ififtcpoi,
EJLJUVW. 1 the the
final words of the saying,
final saying, has the sole sole purpose
purpose of bringingbringing
this question
this question into
into focus: what, according to
what, according to tradition,
tradition, is is
really
really called
called thinking?
thinking?
Our lecture
lecture course has triedtried toto follow
follow thisthis question
question-but but
not by
by detaching
detaching this
this second wayway of of asking
asking from the the whole
of the four questions.
questions. Instead,
Instead, the second way way of asking asking
was from the start start subordinated to to the
the decisive
decisive way way in
which the question "What is
question "VVhat called thinking?"
is called thinking?" remains to to
be asked. That way way is:is what is
: is That which directs directs us us into
into
thinking?
thinking? Our thinking
thinking keeps
keeps to the road and within
to the within the the
domain of traditional
traditional thinking. essential nature
thinking. The essential nature of of our
thinking,
thinking, however,
however, becomes apparent through the
apparent through the transla
transla-
tion of Parmenides'
Parmenides saying.saying. What is is determinmg
determining for the
7
for the
essential nature of AEY£W J/OEw, now,
Xcycw and j*c>u>, now, is is That to to which
their conjunction
conjunction conforms. Presumably
Presumably the the two words concon-
PAll. T II 231
form to
fonn whatever disposes of
to "':hatever of A.iya.v and JOOEiv. by directing
by
and drawmg both
and both toto what they both
they b0th refer to.
to. that is
And that Is
^drawing
COF EJLJL&a.I..
iov f/i|ie><u. 'EOv
*EOF lp.fL£Pa.J.
fifiwu directs that that which comtitutes the the
fundamental
fundamental character of of thinking--the -the A.fyE:w and
and VOEW--
into its own nature. What
its own What so so directs isis what calls on on usa to to
think.
think.
The effort
effort to mate an adequate
to make
adequate translation of of the
the final
words of the saying,
saying, the attempt
attempt toto hear what is is expres..<;ed
in wv
the Greek words IOF Ep.JL&at., is
in the I/I/MHU, is nothing less less than the the
attempt
attempt to take to heart That which calls on an us
us to
to think. To T0
the extent to which we make the effort
the to take it
effort to it so
so to
to heart,
we are
are asking
asking the question
question "What is is called thinking?" in in
the decisive fourth sense:
sense :
What is is That which callscalls on us to to think,

think, byby so
so disposing
the conjunction
conjunction of AiyELV
Xeyco/ and VOEI:v
FOCO* that
that it
it relates toto It?
It?
Insofar as we are capablecapable of asking
asking thethe question in in the
the
fourth,
fourth, decisive
decisive sense,
sense, we also respond to
also respond the third way of
to the of
asking
asking "What is called thinking?"
7'
thinking? The third third way
way is is intent
cm arriving
on arriving at what is is needed, required of
needed, and thus required of us,
us, if
if we
are ever to to accomplish
accomplish thinking
thinking in in an essentially
essentially fitting
manner. No one knows what is is called
called "thioMiig
"thinking" in?
in the
*
the
sense of the third question
question untiluntil he isis capable
capable of A.£-yEw TE
of Xlyep
voeiv re.
VOEtV TE.
thinlring,? we are living
But as concerns thinking living in
in the domain of
of
a two-and-one-half-thousand year year old
old tradition.
tradition. Accord
Accord-
ingly, we must not imagine
ingly, imagine it it to
to be enough
enough for
for any
any man
merely to
merely to inhabit the world of Ms his own representational
representational
ideas, and to express
ideas, express only
only them. For the the world of this
this re
ex-
pression is
pression is shot through
through with blindly
blindly adopted
adopted and urn-re-
un-re-
concepts. How could this
examined ideas and concepts. this confused
manner of of forming
forming ideas
ideas bebe called
called thinking,
thinking, however
however
loudly it
loudly it may
may claim to creative? We
to be creative? We are capable
capable of think-
of think
ing only
ing if we try
only if first of
try first of all
all to
to develop
develop the
the question 6c
What
question "What
is called
is called thinking"
thinking" in its
its fourfold sense,
sense, aoad in the
and in the light
light of
of
decisive fourth question.*
the decisive question:
A
A lecture
lecture course that
that ventures
ventures on
on such
such an
an undertaking
undertaking
must setset itself limits. This is is why we turned the the decisive
fourth question, ""What "What is is That
Thai which directs us us into think-
f*
ing?,''
iag? ? in In the
the direction of of the
the second, "vVhat **What is is thinking
in the traditional sense?"sense?"
But this is is not an historical inquiry inquiry into the the various
various
views of of thinking which have been formed in in the
the course
course of of
its
its history.
history. Rather, our question is: is: what is is That which
directs and disposes us us toward the the basic characteristics
characteristics of of
what in in time develops into Western-European
Western-European thinking? thinking?
What is is it
it that calls,
calls, and to to whose call call something
something responds responds
in
in such a a way
way that it it is
is then called thinking, in
called thinking, in the
the sense
sense ofof
A.iynv of
the AlyeiF of Aoyo*?, as the vOE'iv
as the FOCIF of of reason?
reason? That which calls calls
is what A.iyuv
is XeyiBF and VOE'iv refer to
wmiv refer to because
because it it relates
relates them to to
itself,
itself and that
?
that means usesuses them. It It is
is what the the saying
saying in in its
its
final words calls calls rov EJI+WIOJ..
JOF l/iftepoi.
We are are laboring
laboring to to translate these words for
translate these for one reason,
reason,
and one reason only only:: our sole question is,
sole question is, what is is it
it that
that
calls
calls on us to to think.
think. How else shall we ever
else shall ever hear That which
calls,
calls, which speaks
speaks in m thinking,
thinking, and perhaps perhaps speaksspeaks in in such
a way
way that its its own deepest
deepest core
core isis left
left unspoken?
unspoken?
The question
question of That which calls calls on us to to think
think gives
gives us
the mandate to translate the words IDF lOv Ep.JJ£VOJ..
/z/ie>ai. But have
they
they not already
already been translated
translated into into the
the Latin
Latin ens and esse, esse,
the English
English "being"
"being" and "to be"? It It is
is indeed
indeed superfluous
superfluous
to translate Eov coy EiJ-fW'o.l.
Ifificwu into
into Latin or or English.
English. But it it is
is nec
nec-
essary
essary for us to to translate
translate these
these words finally fmally into into Greek.
Greek.
Such translation is possible only
is possible
only if if we transpose
transpose ourselves
ourselves
into what speaksspeaks from these these words. And this this transposition
transposition
can succeed only only byby a leap,
leap, the leapleap ofof aa single
single vision
vision which
sees what the words rov Iw /4ftPot, heard with Greek ears, ears,
state,
state, or tell.
tell.
Can we see something

something that is told? We can,
is told? can, provided
provided
what is is told is is more than just just the
the sound of of words,
words, provided
provided
the
the seeing is more than just
seeing is just the seeing
seeing with the the eyes
eyes ofof the
the
body.
body. Accordingly,
Accordingly, the transposition
transposition by by the leap leap ofof such
such aa
PART
PART II
II
VISion does
vision does not
not happen
happen of
of itself. Leap and vision rt>quire
long, slow
long ?
slow preparation,
preparation, especially if if we
we are
are to
to transpose
ourselves to
ourselves that word
to that word which is is not
not just cine
one word among
many.
many.
"EEv speaks
*EOF speaks of of what
what speaks in in every word of of the
the lan-
guage, and
guage 7
and not justjust in in every
every word,
word, batbut before all in
all E-lse in
every conjunction
every conjunction of of words,
words, and thus particularly ia in thoile
junctures of
junctures of the language
language which which are are not
not specifically put in in
words. TEop
words. "EEv speaks
speaks throughout
throughout language, and maintains for for
it the
it the possibility
possibility to to tell,
tell, to
to state.
state.
We
We cannot deal deal here with the the preparations needed to to
make that that leap
leap of of vision
vision which transposes us us into That
which speaksspeaks from this this word.
word. Here we cmn can state directly
only what such aa leap
only leap sees.
sees. Whatever has been seen can can be
demonstrated only
demonstrated only by being seen
by being seen and seen again. What lias has
been seenseen cancan never
never be be proved
proved by by adducing reasons and
counter-reasons.
counter-reasons. Such a procedure overlooks
a procedure overlooks what is is de
de-
cisive--the
cisive looking. If
the looking. If what is is seen
seen is
is put
put in
in words, its its
mention by by name can never compel compel the the seeing look. At best,
it
it can offer
offer a token of of what a seeingseeing look,
look, renewed again
and again,
again, would presumably
presumably show more clearly. clearly.
Therefore,
Therefore, when we speak speak of transposition into Uw,
of our transposition
and callcall itit that
that which is is seen,
seen, such a statement always
remains
remains a questioning
questioning statement.
statement. It It looks
looks immediately like
aa mere assertion,
assertion, made
made purely
purely on a whim. 'That That appearance
cannot
cannot be dispelled
dispelled directly.
directly. Thus it it may
may seem an arbitrary
assertion
assertion if if we now say, questioning mode : the
say, in a questioning
: the word
£6v
eav indicates
indicates what is is present,
present, and EJ.lfl£1'fU,
etna* mean "'to
{ftpem, Elva£ "to
be present."
present."
What has has been gained?
gained? We We merely
merely replace
replace the
the accus-
accus
tomed
tomed wordswords "being"
"being" and and "to"to be" with less accustomed
ones-"present"
ones and "to be present." Yet we must admit
"present" and "to be present*"'
that
that the
the word
word "to"to be"
be" always
always dissipates
dissipates like a vapor,
vapor, into
into
every conceivable vague signification, while the word

the word
every conceivable vague signification,
speaks at
^present" speaks
at once
once more
more clearly:
clearly: something
something present,
present,
234
34 WHAT
W H AT C ALL ED THINKING?
IS CAJuLEB T H I N K IN G ?
that isis,7 present to to us.

us. Present and presence means: what is : is
with us.us. And that means : to : to endure in in the
the encounter.
encounter.
We may recall here how Kant, Kant, at the peak of modem
at the modern
European thinking, in in Ms Critique of
his Critique of Pure
Pure Reason defines
defines
the individual being (<5r)
the (OJ,) that is is demonstrable
demonstrable in in its
its being.
being.
Kant defines being being as thee object
as *h object of experience. The object
of experience. object
is
is characterized by by enduring
enduring in in the encounter. The object
the encounter. object
is characterized by
is by presence,,
presence, and thus by by being
being here.
here. IfIf the
individual being,being, ro aw,
ib UP, were not not manifest
manifest even as as some-
thing that is here, beings
is here, beings could
could never
never appear
appear as as objects.
objects. IfIf
ElV«U (Being) did not prevail as aa being
being present,
present, the ques ques-
eff*u (Being) did not prevail as
tion of
tion of the presence of
die presence of the object, that
the object, that is,
is, of
of the object's
object's
objectivity, could
objectivity, could notnot even
even be asked.
asked. If the cw
If the Eov ipfi&at, in
EfL}l£1'a£ 1 in
the sense
the sense of of the being here of
the being of what is is present,
present, diddid not
prevail, Kant's tMnking
prevail, Kant's thinking would have no place place inin which to
make even aa single single statement
statement of of his Critique of
his Critique of Pure Rea Rea-
son.
son. Nor is is this
this all.
all.
If
If the Being
Being of beings,
beings, in in the sense
sense ofof the being
being here of
what is is present,
present, did not already prevail, beings
already prevail, beings could not
have appeared
appeared as as objects,
objects, as as what is is objective
objective in objects
objects--
and only
only by by such objectivity
objectivity do they they become available
available to
the ideas
ideas and propositions
propositions in the positing positing and disposing
disposing of
nature by by which we constantly
constantly taketake inventory
inventory of of the
the ener
ener-
gies
gies we can wrest from nature. disposition of
nature. This disposition of nature
according
according to to its
its energy supply
energy supply arises arises from the the hidden es- es
sence of modern technology.
technology.
If Eivat,
If drat, Being
Being of beings,
beings, did not prevailprevail-in in the sense of
the being
being here and thus objectivity objectivity of of the inventory
inventory of
objects-not
objects not only
only would the airplaneairplane engines
engines fail to frmc-
fail to func
tion,
tion, they
they would not exist. exist. If Being of beings,
If the Being beings, as as the
being
being here of what is is present,
present, were not manifest,
manifest, the elec-elec
tric
tric energy
energy of the atom could never have made its its appear-
appear
ance, could never have put
ance, put man to to work in its its own way way
-work
work in every every respect
respect determined by by technology.
technology.
It
It may
may thusthus be of some importance importance whether we hear
PAET
P.AB.T II
XI 55
what the the decisive

decisive rubric
rubric of Western-European thinking,
rov, says--or
air, says or whether we fail 10 to hear it.it.
It probably
It probably depends
depends on this this Either/Or whether or or not
not we
we
will get
will get beyond
beyond our talk talk about technology and and finally arrive
at a relation
at relation to to its essential nature.
its essential nature. For we must first 0! of all
all
respond to
respond to the nature of of technology, and only afterward
ask whether and how man might become its its master. And
question may
that question may turn out out to
to be nonsensical, because the the
essence of
essence of technology
technology steins stems from the the presence of of what ii is
present, that
present, that is,
is, from the Being of
the Being of beings-something of of
which man never is is the master, of
master, of which he can at at best be be
the servant.
the servant.
The first
first service
service man can render is is 10
to give thought to to the
the
Being beings, and that is
Being of beings, first of
is first of all
all to pay it
to pay it heed. A
remote preparation
preparation therefor is is the attempt
attempt to to give heed, in in
questioning,
questioning, to to what the eov
the word lof says. says. The word says:
presence of what is
presence present. What it
is present. it says
says speaks In in our
speech
speech longlong before thinking
thinking gives attention and a name of
gives attention
its
its own to it. When thinking
to it. thinking is is expressed,
expressed, this unspoken
something
something is merely clothed in a word. It
is merely It is
is not an inven-
discovery, discovered in the presence of the
tion but a discovery,
present
present already expressed in language.
already expressed language.
Greek thinking,
thinking, even before beginnings, is
its bîomii^^
its is at home
with the prevalence of rov

the prevalence lor as
as the presence
presence of what is is pres-
ent. Only thus can thinking
enL Only thinking be awakened and called upon
to
to take
take to present, in respect
to heart the present, respect of its presence- If that
its presence.
happens-and
happens and it happen in the thin.king
it does happen tMnking of the Greek
thinkers
thinkers from Parmenides to to Aristotle--it
Aristotle is still no assur-
it is
ance
ance that such thinking
that such thinking will will also clothe the presence
also dfothe presence of what
in every
is present, in
is present, in words,
words, with all clarity and in
al possible
possible clarity
respect. Even more, the
more, it it remains undecided whether in in the
respect.
wffl appear That which which
"presence
"presence of
of what is present** there will appear
is present"
constitutes
constitutes thethe presence It would be be aa
presence of of what is is present.
present. It
mistake, of beings
mistake, then,
then, forfor us to to take
take the view that Being Being of beings
meant
meant merely,
merely, for for all
all time,
time, the
the presence
presence of what is present.
is present.
236 WHAT CALLED
WHAT IS CALL ED THINit ING? THINKING?
Of course, the the essential nature of of presence alone gives us
enough to think about. And even iMs this--what the the presence
of
of that which is is present might mean in in its
its Greek sense-
has not been adequately traced in in our inquiry.
inquiry.
Not everything that in in some way way is, is, is is present
present in in
the
the same way. way. But we shall now try try to
to bring
bring out at least least
some of of the
the fundamental characteristics
characteristics of of the
the presence
presence of
what is is present. But why why do we translate
translate the the Greek clFoi ETvw.
and € Jw® v.-ith
with "being
"being present"?
present"? Because in in the
the Greek,
Greek, ctvoi
ETval
must always be supplied
supplied tacitly
tacitly and is is often
often made explicitexplicit:
:
'ITU.pE!vru ebrelrai. The 7iapa

tropclm* and amiva.L. coming closer
ird/>a means coining closer; the
5
am>,
cwnJ, going
going away.
away.
The Greeks do not not conceive
conceive of of being
being present
present and abiding abiding
primarily
primarily in in terms of of mere duration.
duration. For the the Greeks,
Greeks, a
totally
totally different
different trait
trait predominates
predominates in in being
being present
present and
abiding-at
abiding at times times specifically expressed through
specifically expressed through 7rapa Trapd and
r.im>.
iut6. To be present
present is
is to
to come close
close by,by, to
to be here in in contrast
contrast
and conflict
conflict with toto be away.
away. But whence does the presence presence
come close:r---and
closer and closer
closer toto what?
A mountain range
A range that lieslies before us us may
may serveserve as as an
example.
example. We We give
give our attention
attention to to the mountains that that are
are
there,
there, not in respect
respect of their geological structure
their geological structure or or geo
geo-
graphical
graphical location,
location, but only respect of
only in respect of their
their being
being pres
pres-
ent.
ent. What is is present
present has risen
risen from unconcealment. It It takes
takes
its
its origin
origin from such a rise rise in its
its being present.
being present. Having Having risen
risen
from unconcealment,
unconcealment, what is is present also
present also has entered entered into
into
what was already
already unconcealed:
unconcealed the mountain range
; range lies
lies in
in
the landscape.
landscape. Its Its presence
presence is the rising
is the rising entry
entry into into what
is
is unconcealed within unconcealment, even and especially
unconcealment, especially
when the mountain range keeps standing as it is,
range keeps standing as it is, extending extending
and jutting.
jutting.
But this rise
rise from unconcealment,
unconcealment, as as the
the entry
entry into into what
is
is unconcealed, does not specifically come to
unconcealed, specifically to the
the fore
fore in
in the
the
presence
presence of what is is present. It
present. It is is part
part ofof presence
presence to hold
to hold
back these traits,
traits, and thus to to let
let come out out only
only that
that which
PART
PART IIII 257
2l7
ispresent.
is present.Even,
Even,and inparticular^
andin particular, that unconcealmentinin
whichthis
which thisrise
riseand entry takes place, remains concealed,iain
andentry
contrastto
contrast tothe
theunconcealed
unconcealed present things.
The presencewe
Thepresence we described
described gathers itselfin inthethe continu-
ancewhich
ance whichcauses
causesaamountain,
mountain,aasea, sea,aa house10to endure and,
by that
by that duration,
duration, toto lie
lie before
before us us among other things that
are present.
are All lying-before-us
present. All lying-before-us isis already constituted in in
presence. And presence itself? Presence
presence. And presence itself? Presence itself isis precisely
the presence
the presence of of what
what is is present,
present, and and remains so so even ifif wwe
specifically stress itsvarious
specifically stress its
varioustraits.
traits. Presence does demandwnr un-
concealment, and
concealment, and is rising from
is aa riabog from unconcealment-though
not generally
not generally but in such
but in such aa wayway that
that presence is is the
the entry
into aa duration
into duration of unconcealment. The
of unconceahnent. The Greeks experience
such duration
such duration as as aa luminous appearance
appearance in in thethe sense of of
illumined, radiant self-manifestation. Continuance is
iHuniined, radiant self-manifestation,
is the
the
coming-to-the-fore that
coming-to-the-fore
that is is at
at rest,
rest, has
has come to rest before
to rest
the unconcealedness
the unconcealedness of of what lieslies before us.us. Rest in duration
is
is not, however, the absence of
not, however, the
of movement
movement. Rest, Rest, inin the
the
presence of what is is present, It gathers the
presence of present, is is a gathering.
gathering. It the
rising to the coming-to-the-fore, with the hidden sudden-
rising to the coming-to-the-fore,
ness The
ness ofof an
an ever-possible absenting into
ever-possible absenting
into concealed.ness. The
1rapa in the Eivai., the coming into into present and
present being and being
Trapa in the elvat, the coming
present, doesdoes not
not mean
mean that what is
that what present comes toward
is present
present,
us men as
us men as an
an object. The 1rapa means
object. The *ra/m
means nearness,
nearness, in the sense
in the
of
of the radiance issuing
the radiance issuing fromfrom unconcealedness
unconcealedness into into uncon-
cealedness. such nearness may m&j bebe
cealedness. WhatWhat hashas come
come nearnear inin such
very distant.
very distant.
to the
Wherever
Wherever the the thinking
thinking of of the
the Greeks
Greeks gives
gives heed to the
presence of what
whatisispresent, the
thetraits
traite of
ofpresence
presence which we
**
presence of present,
mentioned the rising
mentioned fmd find expression:
expression: unconcealedness,
unocmcealednesSy the
from the
fromunconcealedness,
unconcealedness, the the entry
entry into
into unconcealedness,
unconcealedness, the
coming and the going away, the the duration,
duration, thethe gathering,
gathering,
coming and the going away,
the
the radiance, the rest, the
radiance, the rest,
the hidden
hidden suddenness of Pable
suddenness of possible
terms
whosetenns
inwhose
absenting. These
absenting. These
are
arethe thetraits
traitsof presencein
ofpresence
But theyneverneverKave
the
theGreeks
Greeksthought present.But they
of what isispresent.
thought of what
gat*
238
58 WHAT
W HAT C ALL ED THINKING?
IS C4LLEB THIN It IN G ?
thought to the the traits themselves, for for presence did not bebe-
come problematical, questionable to to them as as the
the presence
presence of
what is is present. Why Why not?not? Because the the only
only thing
thing for for
which they asked, and perhaps had to ask, ask, responded
responded and and
replied, that is, is, answered to to their
their questioning
questioning in in these traits
traits
of presence which we mentioned.
of
Subsequent
Subsequent EuropeanEuropean thinking^
thinking, by by asking
asking the question
question
TO &w
T£ TO
ri OJIy7 is
is set On the
set on the appointed
appointed road. presence of what
road. The presence
m present becomes
is becomes for for it
it even
even less
less problematical.
problematical. In fact, fact, it
it
more and more loses loses track
track of the traits
of the traits of
of presence,
presence, to to favor
other
other traits.
traits. The other traits in
other traits in the
the Being
Being of of beings
beings-the the
objectivity
objectivity of of the object which we mentioned,
the object mentioned, the reality reality
of
of the
the real-are
real' are nonetheless
nonetheless still constituted in
still constituted in the funda
funda-
mental character
mental character of of presence;
presence; justjust asas in
in all
all subjectivity
subjectivity the
inromp.&Ov
wwoKdfM&w still still shines through, that
shines through, that which is is present
present as as
what lies
lies before
before us-and
us and corresponding
corresponding to to itit in terms of
intellectual
intellectual grasping
grasping and conceiving,
conceiving, is is the
the modified letlet-
tibog-lie-before-us, AEyEW
ting-lie-before-us, Xeyw as as the Xoyos of logic. logic. This rubric,
rubric,
7
after
after itit was prepared
prepared in in Kant's "transcendental
"transcendental logic/ logic,"
reaches the highest highest meaning
meaning possiblepossible in in metaphysics
metaphysics
through
through Hegel.
Hegel. "Logic"
"Logic" here means the the ontology
ontology of abso abso-
lute
lute subjectivity.
subjectivity. This "logic" 'logic" is discipline, it
is not a discipline, it is
is part
part
of the matter itself; itself in the sense
5
sense of Being,Being, as as Being
Being is is
thought
thought of in Hegel'sHegel's metaphysics,
metaphysics, it it is
is the Being
Being of beings
beings
as
as a whole.
Western logic logic finally
finally becomes logistics,
logistics, whose irresisti-
irresisti
ble development has meanwhile brought
ble development brought forth the elec- elec
tronic
tronic brain,
brain, whereby
whereby man's nature and essence is is adapted
adapted
and fitted
fitted into
into the barely
barely noticed Being
Being of
of beings
beings that
appears
appears in in the nature of of technology.
technology.
Do we attend now in a more questioning questioning attitudeattitude than
before toto what the words lov e&v Ep,JUPat.
efifieycu designate,
designate, the presence
presence
of what is is present?
present? Perhaps,
Perhaps, and if if so,
so, then bestbest by renounc-
by renounc
ing
ing any
any notion that we could succeed at the first
at the first attempt,
attempt,
without long preparation.
long preparation. Public opinion today
opinion today cherishescherishes
PAUT
PAl'!. T II
ii 239
239
that the
the notion that thinking 0! of thinkers must ba be c:apahle of of
being understood in
being in the
the same way as as the
the daily new:;paper.
That allall men cannot all an follow the the thought proces:<;es of of
modern theoretical
theoretical physics
physics is is considered quite in in order. ButBut
to learn
to learn thethe thinMng
thinking of of thinkers is is in
in esSt-nce much more
difficult, not because this
difficult, this thinking is is still more involved
but because it it is
is simple
simple--too too simple for the easy fluency
for the
of common notions.notions.
€0v e/*j^Po^
The 6oi> EJLpoar., according
according to the saying, is That In
to the to
which the \yo> AEyew Tn w&v Te must remain directt'd, $0
voEi.v TC so that
from the conjunction
conjunction of the two there may develop tht
of the the
thinking which is
nature of thinking is subsequently decisive. That
means
means:: the IOP rov eppevai
EJLp.&al lays claim to
lays claim to the
the TE JIOEi•
ne
T for itself,
TE for itself, in respect of
in respect of itself. Only if
itself. Only if the
the letting-lie-
before-us
bef ore-us and the the taMng-to-heart
taking-to-heart conform and join them-
selves
selves toto the rov ?/A/MPuy and remain dependent and focused
COP EJLP£11Gl-,
on the EOVcop ep.p.evar., will their
fLfte>cu will
7
their conjunction
conjunction be sufficient to to the
the
nature of thinking
thinking thatthat isis required
required by by the &w ;.o., lp.p.a;cu. The
XP-rJ,
Xpi?, "it
"it is useful," speaks
is useful/' speaks through
through the lor E?w lp.p.etar., the
presence
presence of of what is is present.
present. The COP EJLP£11G1-, in
E'Ov Ififtcpcu, in aa veiled
fashion, names the "It" in ){P-r],
fashion, x/>4 "It is * s useful.''
useful." The J&r mv
epfjtfvat, therefore names that which calls thinking
EJLp.evat calls thinking into its its
essential nature,
essential nature, intointo the conjunction
conjunction of of Xlysp and VOEiv.
That conjunction
conjunction determines to to what extent subsequent
thinking
thinking definesdefines itself
itself as as &a>.kyeu8cu
B^xXcy^crOm and &amSanAu.
Their nature is is henceforth directed
directed by by logic
logic and dialectic,
logic
logic as as dialectic.
dialectic. The name "logic" "logic" achieves its its highest
dignity
dignity when it it becomes the title title of the supreme
supreme peak of
metaphysics. It It then designates
designates what,what in Hegel's
? Hegel's
Phenomenology
Phenomenology of of Spirit,
Spirit, the spirit
the spirit prepares
prepares for itself as
for itself as its
its
own element,
element, in in which its its moments "extend in the form form ofof
simplicity"
simplicity" and "organise
"organise into into the whole." The movement moTemaat
of
of this
this organization
organization of
of the Absolute is "Logic or
is the "Lo{Jic or Specu-
Specu
lative
lative Philosophy"
Philosophy" (see (see Preface to Phenomenology-
Phenomenology of of
Spirit).
Spirit) .
240 WHAT
W HAT IS C A L LED THINKING?
CABLED T H I N It IN G ?
In eov
Iw EJ.LJLO'W
Ipftmu is is concealed the the call
call that
that calls
calls into
into the
the
thinking of of the
the \Vest.
West
If
If that is is how the the matter stands, stands, the the situation
situation can be be
presented in in a still more succinct succinct form. form. We ·we are
are simply
simply
following
following the the manner of of presentation
presentation which Parmenides
himself considers
considers indicated.
indicated. Instead
Instead of AE')"€£V re
of \&yw TE VOEtv
vo&v T TE, he
?
most often
often says merely vOEZv,
says merely taking-to-heart. Instead
F0tP taking-to-heart.
7
Instead ofof
&v $|4/AF04 he merely
&vlp.p.EVCU merely sayssays Eivru,
clât, oror else
else simply
simply cw,eov.
As the situation
situation has been presented, presented, FOC&P VOEtv--translated
translated
for
for short
short as as thinking-is
thinking is thinkingthinking only only toto the
the extent
extent toto
which it it remains dependent and focused
dependent focused on the the elpai, Being.
Eivai, Being.
NOEZv is
NociF is not "thinking" simply by
"thinking" simply by virtue virtue of of occurring
occurring as as aa
non-material activity
activity of of soul spirit. NOCIP
soul and spirit. qua voelv
NOEZv qua vOEZv
belongs
belongs together
together with Elva,, lva^ and thusthus belongs
belongs to to etvcu itself.
Elvw, itself,
Does Parmenides say say such a thing? He does
a thing? does indeed, for
indeed, for
instance
instance in in the saying
saying identified
identified as as fragment
fragment 55,7 and again again
in the large
large fragment
fragment 8, 8 7 34 ff.
ff.
The first
first passage
passage runs : ;
""TO' ' awo

'TO yap aVTO
, ' VOEW , , re iccu
.... Ecrnv
voiv ecrriv 'TE
..,. ,,
' EI.J'CU.
KIU cl
yap
translation is
The usual translation is : ;
"For it
it is
is the same thing to
thing to think and to
to be."
be."
However,
However, in translating
translating the saying we discussed
the saying discussed bef
before,
ore,
we have learned to to discern
discern more precisely Elvw, means &v
precisely: elvcu: iov
Zfjifievcu, presence
presence of what is is present; while voelv
present while
5
belongs in
voEZv belongs in
one single conjunction with AE'}'EW
single conjunction signifies "taking-to-
Xcyco' and signifies "taking-to-
heart." But what does TO TO ain-6
<WTQ mean in in the
the passage
passage just
just
cited? It It is
is correctly translated
correctly translated with "the "the same."
same." What does does
that mean? Is Is its
its meaning identical
meaning identical with "of "of aa kind"?
kind"? By By
no means. For, ? first, ro
For first, awo
TO avro never has thatthat meaning,
meaning, and
second-as
second as the saying
saying translated earlier makes clear--
translated earlier clear
Parmenides is is far from holding the
holding the view that that Being
Being and
thinking
thinking are are of
of aa kind,
kind, so that we could
so that could indifferently
indifferently sub-
sub
stitute thinking
thinking for being,
being, and being
being for
for thinking.
thinking. But per-
per-
PAHT II
PAl\T 241
241
haps ro
haps TO avro,
avro, the same,
same, can be understood in in the
the sense ofof
"identical."
"identical." In current speech we constantly interchange
the expressions
expressions "identical"
"identical* and "the same." Bui
7
But "idE-ntical'"
in Greek is op.owv, 9
awo.
is 8pmv not dW. Indeed, how can can thinking and
and
being
being ever be identical?
identical? They
They areare precisely what is is differ-
ent:
ent presence
:
presence of of what is is present,
present and taking-to-heart.
7
But it it is just in their

is just their difference
difference that they do do belong
together.
together. Where and how? What is is the
the element in in which
they
they belong
belong together?
together? Is Is it the vofiv,
it the weiwy or the Elm£, or
or the or neither?
Is it,
Is it then,
?
third thing
then, a third thing which in in truth isis the
the first for
for both
-thethe first
first not as their synthesis,
as their but still more primary and
synthesis, but
originary than any
more originary thesis? We learned : VOEW con-
any thesis?
ceived in separation
separation and by by itself,
itselfy that is,
is, conceived without
apart from any
and apart any relation
relation to is simply not
ElJ.W, is
to eiraft, not thinking
at all. If
at all. If confirmation
confirmation were needed, needed, Parmenides himself
tells us so
tells so emphatically
emphatically in in the other
other passage, fragment 8, 8,
34 ff.:
ff.:
"ov
"ov yap am; ToV
yap avEV rov IOPTO? • • •
. . . ro TOF"
CFpifona? TOJIOEiv"
"for not separately
separately from the presence
presence of
of what is
is present
can you
you find out the taking-to-heart."
taking-to-heart/'
When Parmenides here says aVEV row

says cfow roii I&TQ? rather than
avEV elvaly he does so
ctFv TOV ELva£, so probably
probably for for substantiYey
substantive, not just
stylistic reasons. The word tbtEv
stylistic reasons. &w means "without**
"without" In in Ac
the
sense
sense ofof apart
apart from;
from tf.vEV OFCV is
5
the relation
is the relation opposite
opposite toto crrw,
crw?
together.
together. 'Ov yap yap avw--for
&t*v apart from . . . but
for not apart . . .
rather only
only together
together with: with the yap
: -y&.p, jfor
for,7 refers
refers to
?
ra:vr6v,?
to raw&r
TO aV-ro,
TO avroy the same. According!
Accordingly, y' what does
does the word ro ro we ? avro,
the
the same,
"
same ? mean? It
"TO
''
"for
"for the
yap
the same:
It means what belongs
TO yap avro VOE£V

..... , ,
voetv COTF re
EU'TIJI
same taking-to-heart
KO! elvm"
'TE Ka£
so also
is so
E£Va£
",.
belongs together.
together.
presence of what
also presence
taking-to-heart is
:
is present."
is present."
The two belong
belong together
together in this way
in this way,y that
that the
the essential
essential
nature
nature of. VOE'v, named first,
ofyottr, consists in its
first, consists its remaining
remaining fo-o-
242
242 WHAT CALLED
IS CALL
W H AT IS THINKING?
B D THIN X. IN G ?
cused
cused on thethe presence
presence of of what is present, "E6JJ,
is present.. *Ew7 the presence
presence
of what is is present,
present, accordingly
accordingly keeps keeps and guardsguards "VOE'iv
FOC&F
within itself
itself asas what
what belongs it. From £6.,,
belongs to to it. lor^ the
the presence
presence
of
of what is present, there speaks
is present, there speaks the duality the duality of the two.
two.
There speaks from from it it the
the call
call that
that calls
calls us into
into the essential
essential
nature of thinking,
thinking? that that admits thinking
thinking into into its
its own nature
and there keeps

keeps and guards
guards it. it.
How is is this
this so?
so? WhyWhy and in what way way is is thinking
thinking
directed
directed and calledcalled intointo itsits own essential
essential nature by by thethe
it is
Being beings? That it
Being of beings? is so,
so, Parmenides states states unequiv-
unequiv
ocally
ocally in fragments
fragments 5
5 and 8, 54/36.
8, 54/56. Parmenides, it is
Parmenides, it true,
is true,
does not speak

speak of of the
the call.
call. However,
However, he does does say:
say: in in the
the
presence
presence of what is is present
present therethere speaks
speaks the call that calls
call that calls
us
us into
into thinking,
thinking,, the call call that callscalls thinking
thinking into into its
its own
nature inin this

this way,
way, that
that itit directs JIOE'iJI into
directs poctF Elva£.
into elm*.
But in the second of of the two passages passages justjust cited,
cited, ParPar-
menides gives
gives a decisive
decisive indication why why and how vo&v JIOEW
belongs
belongs together
together with Elvai.. elvai. To follow follow this this indication
indication
through,
through, more is is required
required than this this course
course of of lectures
lectures could
could
provide.
provide. WeWe would first first have to to give
give thought
thought to to the
the essen
essen-
tial nature of language,
tial language, in respect respect of of what was said said earlier
earlier
concerning X)w
concerning A.6yos-. It
AE'}'EW and Xoyos. obscure why
It remains obscure why pre pre-
cisely EOJI lp.p.&w.
cisely COF e/iftcra* calls
calls usus into thought,
thought, and in in what way. way.
Let us note well well--EOv COF EJLf.L6"a£,
/xftocu, the presencepresence of of what is is
present, and not what is
present, is present
present as as such and not Being Being as as
such, nor both added together
such, together in in a synthesis,
synthesis, but:but: their
their
duality, emerging
duality, emerging from their their unity
unity kept
kept hidden,
hidden, keeps
keeps thethe
call.
call.
thing, however,
Another thing, however, is is clear
clear : the
: the saying
saying TO ro yap
ylip avro
aln-o
VOE'iv EUTtv
voziv <rriv re TE KOLI
Kat elval becomes the
Elvai becomes the basic
basic theme of of all
all ofof
Western-European thinking.
Western-European thinking. The history history of of that
that thinking
thinking
is at
is at bottom aa sequence
sequence of of variations
variations on on this
this one
one theme,
theme, eveneven
Parmenides' saying
where Parmenides 7
saying is is not
not specifically
specifically cited.
cited. The
The most
magnificent variation,
magnificent variation, which,
which, despite
despite all the variance
all the variance of of its
its
basic metaphysical
basic metaphysical position,position, matches
matches in in its
its greatness
greatness the the
PART II
PAl\T 24S
majesty
majesty of early early Greek thinking, is is that
that proposition of of Kant.
which he thinks as the supreme principle of of all
aU a a priori
synthetic judgments. What Kant calls
synthetic judgments. calls synthetic judgments
a priori
priori is is the modem
modern interpretation of of the
the Al')'tiv TV1'E POEiJII'
•r" pfAwu. In that
CDF EJLfL&CU.
T* EDv that proposition,
proposition, Kant tells us us that., andand
how,
how, thinking-the
thinking the forming forming of of ideas concerning the the Being
of empirical
empirical beings--belongs
beings belongs together with the the Being of of
beings.
beings. But for for Kant,
Kant^ the individual
individual being appears as as an
an
object
object of experience.
experience. "Being"
"Being" indicates the the objectivity of of
the object.
object.
The variation
variation of of Parmenides'
P'armenides* statement nms: :
"The conditions of the possibility of

the possibility" of experience in in gen-
eral are at the same time conditions conditions of the possibility of
of the of the
the
objects of
objects of experience"
experience" (Critique
(Critique of Pure Reason, A 158,
of Pure
B 197)
197) . The "at
. the same time" is
"at the Kant's interpretation of
is Kant's of
TO aln-6,
avrOj "the same!'
same."
What this this statement
statement says
says isis radically different
radically different from what
Parmenides' saying saying (fragment
(fragment 5) 5) says.
says. Parmenides*
Parmenides' state-
ment cannot,
cannot, therefore, interpreted in
therefore, be interpreted in Kant's
Kant's terms,
while the reverse is is both possible necessary. Though
possible and necessary,
Kant says says something
something absolutely different, his
absolutely different, his thinking
moves nonetheless
nonetheless in the same (not (not the
the identical)
identical) sphere
as
as the thinking
thinking of the Greek thinkers. thinkers. What Pannenides
says
says in To yap aln-o
TO yap auro voliJ!
weiv Eu-r£v
&TTW TC Ka£ elrat
TE icai ELva£ is different also
is different
from the statement by by which HegelHegel transposes
transposes and trans trans-
mutes Kant's
Kant's principle
principle into Absolute, when he says
into the Absolute, says that
"Being
"Being is is Thinking"
Thinking" (Preface
(Preface to Phenomenolo&y of
to Phenomenology of
Spirit).
Spirit) .
Our questioning
questioning can arrive arrive at at what is is called
called thinking
thinking
only
only if if we paypay heed to to what we are are called
called to
to do
do-MyEWXeycir TC
Tf:
voziv T'
voliv eov EJL(.LEVat,
T'CW /xfii/cu,
and with it to be on the quest
it to quest and looklook-
out
out for
for what calls,calls, the eov
eoi/ EJLJLEVat, presence of
l/jficwu, the presence of what is is
present, the duality of what the
present, the duality of
the one word,
word, thethe participle
participle
of
of participles,
participles, the
the word eov eov designates:
designates what is
: is present
present in in
presence.
presence.
244 WHAT CALI*EB
WHAT IS C THINKING??
ALL ED THIN It IN G
"What
**What is is called
called thinking?"
thinMng?" At the the end we return
return toto the
the
question
question we asked at first when we found out what our word
at first
"thinking" originally means. Thane means memory,
"thinking" originally memory,
thinking
thinking that recalls,
recalls, thanks.
But in the meantime we have learned learned to to see
see that
that the
essential
essential nature of of thinking
thinking isis determined by by what there
there is
is
to be thought
thought about:
about the
:the presence
presence of of what is is present,
present, the
Being
Being of beings.
beings. Thinking
thinking only only when it recalls
it recalls
in thought rov,
thought the CDF, That which this this word indicates
indicates prop
prop-
erly
erly and truly,
truly, that
that is,
is unspoken, tacitly. And that
unspoken, tacitly.
?
that is
is the
duality
duality ofof beings
beings and Being.
Being. This quality
quality isis what properly
properly
gives
gives food forfor thought.
thought. And what is is soso given,
given, is
is the
the gift
gift of
of
what is
is most worthy
worthy of question.
question.
Can thinking
thinking take
take this
this gift into its
gift into its hands,
hands, that
that is,
is, take
take it
it
to heart,
to heart, in
in order toto entrust
entrust it in Xeycip,
it in the telling
A.i'}'£w, in the telling state-
state
ment,
ment, to
to the
the original
original speech
speech of language?
language?

Heidegger What Is Called Thinking

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Heidegger What Is Called Thinking

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MARTIN

A Translation of Was Heisst

I.llmAllY CONGIIESS CATALOG CARD

REUGious PERSPECTIVES represents

The volumes in this Series

What Is Is Called Thinking?

"We come to thinking means when we ourselves

but the way

classify and "locate" him in

own previous thought- If

them and ourselves together. 'Ibis

are the thinkers

how can we even give

"We are a sign

We? Who? We We the men of today,

By way of this this series lectures, we are

well ifif the strangeness

decided the fate

"We are a sign is not read,

"Who has most deeply

"Who has most deeply

Summary and Transition

with the conclusion of the lecture. There we said

When we attempt to learn what is

thought-provoking. In our thought-provoking

need in in no wayway be what causes causes us us worry

What is is most thought-provoking, then,

level. Our minds hold views on all

out of of the "U" and study study "phy.

we wait forfor the sun to to rise,

come about. This is why we must even now pay

tree isis blossoming"-our

we do not attainattain the direction,

nineteenth- and twentieth-century

than where he fmds

But we here leave to to one side the findings

buzzing about in in our heads.

on which we really really stand.

think the matter is is such and such,"

such/ and with it it has

that mean? We are still inter

words are such an expression,

still knew nothing

tifically, that classification

"Postmark Torino, 44 Jan

The man whom he who passes over overpasses

homo est est animal rationale--man

have invented happiness'-say

statement would join join with Nietzsche's

the same manner,

For there is is no universal schema which could be applied

Summary and Transition

its own powers

thought, begins with man's essential

"I was born asas a plant

"Thus man grows

Even the later Nietzsche, the man who,

thought, one requires

bridge rainbow after

being talked about and what isis being

and yetyet may

whether as such or in the form of of psychotherapy

"In the fmal