3.11/H2) The emerging New World Disorder

Knowledge to 6Om control the multiplication of desirable objectives to out-maneuver any H2-superior order is not an inexplicable bound from subject to object and return (Steiner 1978): "But no sooner was the 'phenomenon of knowing the world' grasped than it got interpreted in a 'superficial', formal manner." Obviously this is philosophy looking in its mirror and projecting what it sees into the zeitgeist! The evidence for this is the procedure still customary today, of setting up knowing as a 'relation between subject and object – a procedure in which there lurks as much 'truth' as vacuity. And who invented this "Ricola" of anything goes as you please?

However with such an OPTION I mind it is normal to end op feeling lousy forcing you to seek for new kicks. But subject and object do not coincide with Dasein and the world, as" Heidegger (1962) put it, for a principle task is to reveal that knowing has a phenomenal character of a Being which is in and towards the world - but according to the Bible, not of it! Heidegger avoided the latter truth for it makes you use your OPTION II to transcend the OPTION I world! Beware that, even mentioning names and words to that end, for it is uncool in the zeitgeist and poisonous among philosophers who are mainly concerned with maintaining the leading tune in pre-trans- traping anybody with OPTION II as Nazi spin doctors did it towards the Jews as their scapegoats and as their fig leaf for their hidden agenda! And by what logic can philosophers thus mislead humanity?

Unlink Einstein, concerned to fit experiments, philosophy is in fact a mental mafia that %6-projects its interpretation of the zeitgeist as the source for definition power! Knowing, really in terms of %5-mass manipulation, according to Heidegger is the possession of those human-"Things" by which you become able to know how to be on top of the %1-polirival correctness, and that is the internal characteristic, or the hidden agenda of those entities, above all philosophers and the disciples in all disciplines of established science of the humanities which apply those "Things", of which philosophers +2 want more of the same to get their fame, in word-magical ways. Heidegger expanded upon this by saying that knowing is a 'concern' and to know something, even with little interest, based on, in the philosophical context, of expressing -4 disgust about freedom limiting substance, is a tangible kind of Being-in-the-world. In fact for Heidegger, even forgetting what you once knew modifies the primordial Being-in, however, even as knowledge did not create the world nor forgetting it will destroys it. It follows that Dasein only realizes itself when it grasps reality (Steiner 1978) - to *3-survive egoistically as a subject in view of objects, in the philosophical sense. This is ?0-illusionary talking in the ZG-zeitgeist, around life- through task-fulfillment to leave it philosophically encapsulated as long as the devilish OPTION I rules the wordy world. In short personally relevant insights and their under-standing are cast out from Heidegger's Dasein! What he defines is the legitimate one in the zeitgeist, for what goes beyond is poisonous to philosophy. But in fact it is casting the shadow of the consequences of its thinking catastrophes, as human catastrophes. Heidegger proclaimed that we are 'thrown' into the world and that our Being-in-the-world is a 'thrownness' [Geworfenheit]. This makes the Creator of it all an arbitrary thrower, if worth mentioning at all. And of course this applies to any human with insights beyond the zeitgeist dogmas of philosophy; he or she is to just seen as poking in the dark with his or her 8 dark inner evil voices, which in pretending to reach beyond, in fact aim at the top of OPTION I as in the Middle Ages, really the abyss beyond the Flat Earth where people fail at the heights of their impotence with their thus outsourced potential, OPTION II. To Heidegger this thrower concept is a primordial banality which as he put it to appear original, had long been overlooked by metaphysical conjecture. Humans beings are thrown with neither prior knowledge nor individual option into a world that was there before and will remain there after they are gone (Steiner 1978). Heidegger thus dropped his humanistic mask when he wrote; "This characteristic of Dasein's Being – this 'that it is' – is veiled in its 'whence' and 'whither', yet disclosed in itself all the more unveiledly; we call it the ' thrownness' of this entity into its 'there'; indeed, it is thrown in such a way that, as Being-in-the-world, it is the 'there'." The expression 'thrownness' is meant to suggest the facticity of its being delivered over" – main thing, such substance less, personally-neutral wordy expressions remain the building blocks of the OPTION I MATRIX ruthless against any OPTION II, and philosophers can throw their hypes wherever an opening beyond OPTION I is suggested by someone just like a net to get them back…

No biology of parentage can answer the question of whence we came into Being. Neither do we know toward what end our existence has been projected, apart from our position in relation to death – under philosophy's OPTION I. Yet for Heidegger, it is this twofold mystery that makes the 'thrown' state of human life the more absolute and tangible. Human kind is 'delivered over' to a total, all-encompassing 'thereness' and Dasein must occupy this presentness and take it up into its own existence. In short OPTION I must be maintained at all cost! Heidegger wished to emphasize the unmistakable 'thereness' of the world into which we are thrown (Steiner 1978). The world into which our Dasein is thrown has others in it, and the existence of others is totally indispensable to its facticity of Being-there. Understanding of others in the world and the association of the ontological status of others with our own Dasein is, in itself, a form of Being. Heidegger said that Being-in-the-world is a being-with, and that the understanding of the presentness of others is to exist. However, being-with presents the possibility of comprehending our own Dasein as an everyday Being-with-one-another where we may come to exist not on our own terms, but only in reference to others. In so doing, we eventually come to not be ourselves, and surrender our existence to a formless 'Theyness' or alterity (Steiner 1978). For Heidegger, the 'belonging to others' is a drastic irresponsibility because the 'they' deprives the particular Dasein of its own accountability by making every decision and judgement for it. The 'they' can do this most easily because it can always be said that 'they' were responsible for such and such. Heidegger said that this passivity creates the alienated self, the 'Man' who is fatally disburdened of moral autonomy and, therefore, of moral responsibility. This 'Man' can know no ethical guilt. Heidegger called this the 'self of everyday Dasein' or the 'they-self', the total opposite of the solid singularity of a Dasein which has grasped itself. This crucial distinction was important for Heidegger as it is the distinction between an authentic and an inauthentic human existence (Steiner 1978). In this way today's states do no longer belong to themselves and their investors are largely investing in other states and taking responsibility for one's own state is denounced as fascism.

Context