Anthropological Raptus number 6/241
for gottrekorder e.v. Graz
A
Vienna, 19.10. 2016
Andromeda – The Origin of Anxiety / Der Ursprung der Angst
“Anxiety is a false concept.” ...
It refers to the possibility for the possibility of decision. Good. In the possibility lies the malaise, the unease, as an anthropological quality with consequences. The consequences are quantitative. A quantity. The consequences can be ‘great’; they are thus negotiated with reference to everyday humane existence. Great consequences – small consequences. OK.
The possibility (for decision), the anxiety in the absence of the associated historical individual that quantifies it, appears to be something detached. It does not enter into appearance within the same space of verification (morality). It is not ‘negotiated’ at all.
Accordingly, anxiety is verifiable – for it is ‘given’ – as the uncertainty of the possible, contrasted with the certainty of the impossible – mythic. Even ‘pre-mythical’. Pre-historic – and magical in its applicability. In any case, in the sense that it is pre-historic, it is also pre-moral.
‘Magic has fundamentally nothing to do with religion; it is neither a primitive level of religion nor a specific zone within individual religions. (Magic is knowledge of effective forces in the natural environment of human beings and a means to their conquest, of protecting against harm and enforcing benefit. Thus magic is science, or as applied science, technology.)’ *
Indirectly, anxiety no longer has much in common with religion. Is it the common origin of magic and religion? Perhaps not even that. Religion is not beholden to anxiety. Religion is religion only when and because it is beholden to itself and no longer treats its origin as negotiable. Thus a template detached from its origin, whose motivation and whose peculiar rhetoric is no longer verifiable.
Here the following applies:
The lie is beholden to the truth! Its truth!
In this case it is not a ‘pseudo’: not something purported against better knowledge, a trick, but rather a true lie. A truth based on the fundament of the lie; like repression, in which the repressed content no longer itself appears in the area about which it (the lie) thinks, to which it refers.
The lie is therefore beholden to a specific truth; in the case of religion, to itself, for its ‘self’ is pure rhetoric, or faith by convention.
Rhetorically, I could say that I realised this for the first time when …
it became clear to me that I experienced, or quantitatively, superlatively, ‘saw’ this or that.
That would fit. Hence a rhetorical form.
But is it true or not? I became in fact aware of this or that when I … This is a historical truth. But does it fit or not? How could one know?
Matter, form and religion are per se the true lie. Not the lie against better knowledge (pseudo), but the truth of the lie itself. Almost a principle that thereby obtains (already alone) because it marks and founds an origin, with which it itself enters into thought and into the world! It thus determines the origin of its thought!
In form, matter becomes a function of rhetoric. A total ‘how’ that lets the lie of the (purported) content become ‘true’ because this ‘how’ is more fitting, quantitative. At least it seems fitting (rhetoric), and this corporeal appearance (form) is sufficient. The body is the appearance of a lie, in this case a religious lie. If also a tautology.
The body of Christ (predominantly offered to view hanging on the cross) is not the incarnation of the question of faith, that is, of the faith in a religion, but rather the origin of a dialectic that is already decoupled from this faith and deemed ‘true’, whether or not one believes.
In this form (for otherwise the body is perhaps never existent), the body is the rhetoric of the true certainty of faith, its beginning and end at the same time. A mute document in the flux of the attempt to develop morals. Pure history.
And even if this anthropological premise should again become negotiable, within a moralism that verifies its own development, it must still be noted that the premise will never be able to become the origin of anxiety in these mouldings.
The question remains whether religion (and every forming of anxiety into specific fears)is a phenomenon of anxiety.
It is phenotypical here that the possibility of diversity is repudiated as a menace in favour of a readjusted set of regulations preaching guardedness, rigour and fear.
Thus whether and how anxiety can be an experience that leads, via perception, into a set of regulations and into a weltanschauung.
Anxiety remains. It is constant – albeit in the beyond.
* Helmet de Boor, Die Deutsche Literatur von Karl dem Grossen bis zum Beginn der Höfischen Dichtung 770 – 1170, C.H. Beck’sche Verlagbuchhandlung, München, c 1949, p.89
B ‘Fear is a false concept’ .. and viewed as a whole, justifies the possible!
Andromeda, we’re coming!*
Through the earth,
through the damnations,
through the sun,
through caressing flames,
we begin
to stop the unstoppable,
Andromeda,
we’re coming.
Goodbye, unwritten physics,
goodbye, totalitarian chemistry,
goodbye, psychical anthropology
welcome, infinite geography!
Adieu, my old wigwam.
adieu, my old peace pipe,
adieu, beloved penguin nation
adieu, civilisation!
Adieu, my unprecedented orgasm
in you, beloved Earth;
Welcome!
Beloved Aurora, beloved Andromeda.
(*Imants Daksis)
[Quelle: Einladung]
