84
The world in reconstruction. (Cf. p. 30–31, 45.)
What seeks to become—in which tasks it thrusts itself forward— which perspectives compel these tasks; which happening (being— truth) is here at work—need to catch sight of and liberate this “work” in its fore-working.
85
Philosophy is never “of” or “about” something—always only for—for being.
All questioning is disclosive questioning; all investigating and analyzing, a fortiori and in the first place all projection and forming of a work, constitute an effectuating. (Cf. p. 40.)
But this not primarily a “working” “on” something; practical!—instead, the work is effectuated in that being brings it about. That holds in a derivative sense also of science. Therefore, already a mistake to start with “object” and “theme” and remain there.
First out of such an originary calling of the work and only out of it the first consecration and inevitability of the clear hardness of the concept.
86
We first find God again when we lose the world no longer and truly exist in the power of world-formation.
87
Why do eager reviewers and writers so uniformly and definitely shirk when it comes to the decisive treatise, “On the Essence of Ground”?
Enough already here with the reckoning up of “influences” and of the dependencies on Husserl, Dilthey, Kierkegaard, and whoever. Here the task was—if anything—to put into effect a confrontation with antiquity and with the retrieved problem of being. Instead of which, manifest prattle keeps piling up from week to week.
And now even idle talk about “philosophy of existence.”—The masters may let themselves be “influenced” indeed by Kierkegaard, Kant, Hegel—; it is easy to see where this gets them. It is the peculiarity of an “influence.” | When people repeat Hartmann or Cassirer or anyone else, or even when, as is mostly the case, they repeat some rootless and homeless “general opinion,”—they mean that that is no influence. But such idle talk is never to be eradicated.