What should happen? Taking action—creatively acting and only “speaking” of it to oneself.
The task is now:
To win back the beginning—to question again within its most intrinsic questions—; admittedly, that is possible only if we ourselves have appropriated the questioning. What does not help here is merely to modify or append.
For instance: instead of being, becoming (Nietzsche).
instead of the present-at-hand, the past, and instead of the elevated “eternal,” the so-called present. instead of spirit, the soul and the body.
rather:
the task is to disclosively question the full essence of being—wherein presence (the “is”) is positively fused, and at the same time its predominance is struck within its limits.
Being must unfold its horizon further and now indeed fully (time). That means: the attunement.
The partitioning must determine the attunement—it must form the horizon for being—(space—time).
Not the “it is,” but the “let it be” (thrown projection) and specifically the “let it be” of the original taciturnity.
133
The essence of being is truth (ἀλήθεια); therefore truth is to be questioned disclosively in its ground and origin. Yet precisely for that reason it is erroneous to grasp being on the basis of the “true” proposition (judgment); for such is not the truth.
134
Crisis of science and of the concept of science!
Indeed we still do not at all possess the space and the perspectives in which a genuine and fruitful crisis becomes possible.
If we do not succeed in actually doing something again with the beginning of Western philosophy, then the end is inevitable. Why? Cannot something later likewise serve to stimulate and lead? Must there always be this going back?
Indeed a going back cannot actually be carried through, since we exist in a tradition insofar as we exist at all. It is not a matter of choice.
Yet why back to the beginning? Because to us more than ever, and to Western philosophy already for a long time, simplicity, essentiality, and a sense for the originary are lacking.