NIGITOLOGY OF M. HEIDEGGER’S NAME OF BEING

Abstract

This article is devoted to the consideration of one of the crucial issues of Heidegger's thinking, the subject of which is the naming of Being under the pressure of Heidegger’s universalized idea of ​​Being groundlessness, rooted in the phenomenon of Nothingness. Radicalizing what has been said: the major problem of the article is dedicated to finding a more comprehensible, self-evident, and pellucid concept for Being than being itself, which encompassed the scientific research of the late Heidegger. It can be found among the significant corpus of his works, an outlined range of concepts that he used as an alternative one in speaking about Being. It is worth emphasizing that here the author of this article doesn’t mean the “being of beings” impersonated in the concept of Dasein, but Being with a capital letter in the sense that is already used in the Ukrainian translation in the form of Manifestation, i.e. Ereignis. Nevertheless, the article asserts the view that it is by no means the only name of non-predicated Being, except for its identification with total Nothingness. The great variety of Heidegger's names of Being is considered on the example of his most used concepts, among which the author, in addition to Ereignis, singles out primarily the Greek truth-ἀλήθεια and the accompanying concepts of ἐνέργεια, es gibt and copula. At the same time, the negative nature of kairological time as well as eontological time is clarified, which anew confirms the non-accidentality of the phenomenon of time chosen by Heidegger on a par with Being in his magnum opus. Furthermore, in the article isn’t ignored such local Heideggerian concepts as Abßgrund, Ungrund, Austrag, Verwüstung, and Gründung, owing to the analysis of which, among others, Heidegger's nigitological view of Being acquires integrity. The concept of nigitology was chosen by the author to particularly emphasize Heidegger's appeal to the historical and philosophical tradition of considering the phenomenon of Nothing with all the concepts derived from it, which are subsequently directly related to the negative interpretation of Being. Despite the primitivization of the phenomenon of negativity towards simplified forms of logic negation in the history of philosophy, as well as the squandering of the name of being before Heidegger, it’s underlined that the negative theses defined by Greeks on the question of being gave rise to the Western type of thinking as such, which turned the object of its own anxiety in the form of Nothing into one of the central concepts of ontology. The common feature of the above names of Being is their superlativeness, which simultaneously makes the conclusions to which it leads to be counterintuitive. In fact, thanks to this, the relevance of the current research is confirmed within the framework of the core issue for all forms of ontology: bringing Being to the real concept, considering the negative tendency of the names of Being to self-concealment and the presence of the semantic motifs of redundancy and shortage contemporaneously. Therefore, the analysis of the name of being in the spectrum of nigitology must be accompanied by a general dismantling of the classical positive meaning of the stated concepts, and only in these circumstances the transition to the so-called “new beginning”, initiated by M. Heidegger, can be regarded as finalized.