Splerg

I think that sometimes I would get on this blog and I would just simply write without knowing where I was going with it. I remember that I felt really good about it because both Foucault and David Shields had informed me that the word essay comes from the word assay, an attempt, a setting out, a journey of sorts. One does not need to know where one is going when one begins to write. One simply begins to write.

I once heard Rick Roderick praise Heidegger's ability to simply start writing. He didn't waste time with clearing out his presuppositions, making the space for thought, he just begun thinking.

Thinking is the clutch word, the one we want to remember. As a new friend pointed out to me, philosophy as a noun has always been a bit tricky. Philosophizing is a thing we do, not a thing that is. Thinking is what we are after, not thought.

It's interesting I recently found myself uncomfortable with the word argument. I think that thinking sounds way better than argument. Because I don't know what the argument is. It has too many connotations of an already settled view, of an attempt to persuade others. It feels eristical, whereas I'd like to feel dialectical.

I like something Nietzsche said. To paraphrase, 'it's hard enough for me to remember my opinions let alone the reasons for holding them!'

Thinking is such a lively activity, such a rewarding process. Why settle it into a state? Why finalize it into a system or a world view? What is good in stability in thought?

Where is stability in the world? Is all thought Procrustean, artificially stable? Is stability only an outcome of practical necessity? Or can we intelligently speculate on stability?