Noemas of the Logos
by gheorghe Sârbu

One of the thoughts that has been haunting my mind for a long time is extremely fortunately expressed by Mr. H-R Patapievici in the phrase of “the thinking that thinks it” (an argument and a defense) in his book “The Sky seen through the Lens”, published at the Nemira Publishing House, Bucharest, 1996, in the TODEM collection. As far as I am concerned, I openly declare that this effect of a cause, that I am not the only one who sees the “Whole” which expresses us through the idea of rethinking thinking, has brought much joy to my soul, with a good reason I dare say, especially if I connect this meaning to Voltaire’s words: “minds (of a certain height) meet”. Far be it from me to locate myself there; in my opinion, an artist’s mind is that which only passes its body into non-existence; with respect to the way it will be, or, more specifically, to the way in which the idea itself will be received, I have no possibility to foresee any premise; then, it wouldn’t be nice of me to plume myself with certain merits whose fruits I cannot even discern. On the other hand, I must say that the phrase of “the thinking that thinks it”, from this moment on it becomes an opportunity for me: a) to say a few words about Mr. H-R Patapievici’s discourse, and b) to see if the idea of re-thinking thinking, both for my personal use and for the much larger use of the other thinking forms, whether they are connected either to being gifted or to the common people’s intelligence, but especially to see whether the connection between the low element of “that’s the way it is” and the high element of “that’s not the way it is”, to the value they have or they acquire from the “reality of things”, it stands any chance or not. For a more “basic” symbiosis, I am beginning this intervention by approaching the subject from subpoint (b), leaving the subpoint (a) come into the riverbed of arguments, which I understand to use in order to obtain a demonstration, not as a purpose (which is rather a insurgent term) but as an effect of a cause. After all, in such forays, it is not the logic that has the precedence.
The idea is the subsequent form, the Thought is the initial form. This distinction, so abruptly said, acquires the form of an immanence in its turn, and thus of a new material for a philosophical method/ system. From this moment on, we raise the problem of the Idea’s change of place, of its value in relation to its position of balance; in other words, the value of “that’s the way it is” of the low element, in relation to “that’s not the way it is” of the high element, simultaneously with the value given at a certain point. If the value of the idea in itself, in its capacity of Novelty does not prove to be itinerant with the entirety of the existent values – cumulated to a certain field of interest, then we have nothing to do with the effect of a cause, and therefore the respective idea is not a cause. Things, being already complicated in what is alike, Fractal Geometry, B. Mandelbrot, get even more complicated, through what is different, Notes and Counternotes, Eugen Ionescu. At this point, I consider it necessary to make the following explanation: a work of art is not a cause, and so much the less an effect of a cause. The attribute of artist, therefore, is neither guided, nor generated, - The Philosophy of History, Hegel. The real artist does not value discrimination too much; he is, ad unum – ab origine, what chaos is for order – that is, the unforeseen of the crux in unthings. The only law he takes into account, but whose function he refuses to use, is the law of the incantation Ego. Nothing very clearly defined, and yet, implacably exact; it breathes in/ inspires not to breathe out, but to transpire the breathing; thus, the meaning, the sense as well as the purpose, are out of the question. From beyond it all, and underlining underneath everything else, we find the idea of rethinking the thinking, which leads us to the question: if the idea is the subsequent form, and the thought is the initial form, in which side of the perimeter can we place inspiration? In other words, the “categories”, starting from the third upwards, are still necessary or not? The steam railway engine has meant for progress what the Iliad and the Odyssey have meant for the evolution, with one remark: the first example is part of a social body, the second is part of a complementary soul. With all the clear-cut difference between this field and the other field of interpretation, upstream, the following remark stands out: beyond good and evil, that is “beyond us”, dwells the incantation Ego. This bog-bang of the system of values according to the “reality of things” in the entire quintessence; there are two categories in which we must perceive the reality of things – the Voque and the Equivoque; from the third category upward the abolition of contrary intervenes, and thus the possibility that the cause “itself” should be become the effect “itself” of the cause. As far as inspiration is concerned, it can be found both in the Voque, and in the Equi-Voque. The inspiration is therefore a start-up in and of the process of rethinking of the thinking. It is the function radical of these two categories, different from zero, and from their position of balance, having political power as index, that the day and night of the civilization form have been and always be depending on.

The opinion according to which things belonging to the soul are cannot be seen, and those belonging to the body can, is false; I am trying to believe that this is what Mr. H.-R. Patapievici means by “… if we accept this transcendental meaning granted to individuality, - the individuality being the procedure by which our creative thinking selects the uni-equivocations of multiplicity – then we can say that individuality is the unavoidable destiny of a certain way of being a human.” The question that follows now comes in a natural way: how many ways of “being human” do we know? Only one, the answer comes: the natural way. Obviously, the natural way, during its evolution, has had to receive in the cell of its character the fact that it is a worldly form, a point of view different from the same. That this should be the situation in “there is“, we need no further demonstration. Destiny or not, one thing is certain: vocation is a-personal. Example: the peasant from anywhere, in order to show the category of the function radical, has the land, sows and harvests the fruit of the land. Ploughing, as well as the natural or chemical fertilization of the arable lands, weeding, etc. , as well as all the other works up to now or from now on but all from here, are connected to the destiny or, even more concrete, the temporal non-fact; the skill he understands to use in accomplishing all of them is connected to his professionalism, that is to the (personal) informational data bank; how to turn too much rain, manna, hailstone, and others in his favor, is connected to his experience, actually to the memory feeling. All these circumstances together are connected to the vocation of the sign or to the land worker. Ploughing, like all other works, including the harvesting work, thus proceed to optionally becoming reality, that is they stand free in his free way of being a human. Too much rain, manna, hailstone, and others get out of control and thus become part of the quantum of opportunities, which expresses in itself that the dimension of icunatism, be it destiny or gift (vocation) in its turn being dependent on the high element, which, unlike the low element, is not Voque (cause and effect of cause), but Equivoque, thus we can say about our incantation Ego that it is that plasmatic greed which corrects the extra-crux abbreviations of “there is”. In other words, the incantation Ego replaces the “Whole”, which makes the reality of things become part of the Voque of its Equivoque; which is normal, if we admit that reality exceeds fiction.

In the subjects connected to logos, plus added to minus is plus. The right calculation on this subject is given by philosophy.
Re4thinking the thinking,- Plato.
Thinking the thinking,- Socrates.
And why not? ...
What Mr. H.-R. Patapievici establishes.
Exactly « as I was saying» according to Mr. Virgil Ierunca’s Foreword.
And this is how, from the Equivoque, the logos brings into the Voque the Thinking Method Elongalogy, a new chapter in philosophy. But as far as this “there is ” in progress is concerned, this is enough for the time being; not only Mr. Cioran gave up « the average term» Categories, Aristotle, but, as I notice to my delight, this manner of approaching the problems in discussion (the dimension of icunatism) is also present in “The Sky Seen through the Lens”, H.-R.Patapievici; a well-positioned demarche from now on.
“Concord increases the value of small things; discord destroys even the value of great things”1, a thing in itself « with no testament» 2 .
« Ad rem » 3 .

1.- Concordia parvae res crescunt, discordia maximae dilabuntur .
2.- Ab intestat.
3.- To the point, straight, exact.

For details , please , website: http://www.sarbu.ro