The mathematical character of modernity

[Kai Frederik Lorentzen]

>  ... Chapter 3 traces a critique of the ‘‘mathematical’’ character of 
modernity thatbegins in Heidegger’s graduate-school days and endures 
throughout his life. Here Elden’s reading is at its most sympathetic and 
his explanations are at their strongest,as he draws on his training in 
geography and his familiarity with the history of mathematics to 
elucidate Heidegger’s analyses. Once again, Aristotle proves to be 
crucial. For Aristotle, ‘‘Place is something belonging to beings as 
such: it is their capacity to be present’’ (129). Geometry is then only 
an abstraction from what is; itdoes not exhaust the meaning of being or 
place. In contrast, Descartes projects an a priori concept of the 
material world such that ‘‘geometry is no longer simply an
abstraction
  from being, but is seen as a generalisation of being’’ (135). That is, 
geometrical space is now understood as ‘‘constituent of reality’’ (136). 
Time, too, is now conceived in exclusively mathematical terms (123). 
This mathematicalworld view restricts our experience and implies a 
technological approach to beings that is manifested in modern politics. 
Heidegger’s
  Contributions to Philosophy
(GA65, written 1936–1938) develop this insight in their interpretations 
of phenomena such as ‘‘machination’’ and ‘‘the gigantic’’ (144–157). 
Heideggerincreasingly sees Nazi ideology as philosophically bankrupt, as 
just anotherpermutation of the modern mathematical-technological will to 
power.In his conclusion, ‘‘Taking the Measure of the Political,’’ Elden 
comments onsome postwar texts, showing, for example, that the ‘‘Letter 
on Humanism’’continues Heidegger’s ‘‘critique of calculative politics’’ 
in its remarks onnationalism and internationalism (171). Heidegger’s 
ongoing engagement with Hölderlin is ‘‘a rethinking of measure’’ in 
nonmathematical terms (174). Finally, some comments on Badiou remind us 
that the question of the nature and role of mathematical thought is 
still far from settled: Badiou claims, in a highly un-Heideggerian 
spirit, that ‘‘ontology is mathematics’’ (178), although he also holds 
that the singularity of the ‘‘event’’ eludes mathematics (180). Elden’s 
larger goal is not simply to interpret Heidegger, but to raise the 
fundamental question of ‘‘the relation between politics and number’’ 
(1). One connection he sees is that ‘‘modern technology requires a view 
of space as mappable, controllable and capable of domination; modern 
politics is able to fullyexploit this’’ (3). He proposes that 
‘‘understanding Nazism through the lens of calculation, which Heidegger 
began but never worked through in any thorough manner, is one way in 
which Heidegger’s thought can be employed for moreprogressive political 
aims than those he chose for it himself’’ (177) <

http://www.academia.edu/8144161/Stuart_Elden_Speaking_Against_Number_Heidegger_Language_and_the_Politics_of_Calculation

Gravity's Rainbow contributes to "understanding Nazism through the lens 
of calculation".



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20140924/63863119/attachment.html>