And if that meditation ever proceeds to the extreme and brings the essence of truth itself up for decision, then indeed the effectuation of the meditation will require a long time and will follow paths which those very paths will slowly make unrecognizable and otiose in their upsurging configuration—but there will once again be in a few great hearts an illumination of that beginning. The beginnings withdraw from every will | to seize hold of them; in withdrawing, they merely leave behind the outset as their mask.
249
“Worldviews” remain outside the sphere of creative thinking (philosophy) and of great art as well. They are ways in which philosophy and art are immediately brought—i.e., directed—to use or rather to misuse by everyone. Therefore, philosophy can never be “worldview,” nor may philosophy ever think to take over the place of worldview. Indeed philosophy cannot even determine a worldview as such—but must merely tolerate being used—or passed over—by worldview.
The so-called theoretical groundings of worldviews are therefore a peculiar mix of half philosophy and half science; they lack the seriousness of thinking as well as the strictness of research. Both thinking and science are replaced in advance by a desire to postulate the “worldview” immediately. Thus it is always misguided to measure such groundings of worldview with | the standard of philosophy or science, both of which are radically different from worldview.
These groundings have value only as contributing to that use the worldview itself serves. But philosophy is intrinsically useless; “science,” in relation to “worldview,” has a definite though restricted use.
250
The extraordinary can never be the conspicuous; the most extrinsic must be the most intrinsic.
251
In restraint lies a concealed boldness.
252
How dreadful can that slavery become which arises from the immediate subjection into which all opposition and contention necessarily fall?