#geworfenheit

[lavideenrose]

[techramonic]

The Freethinker: The Mass Shooter Archetype

INTRODUCTION

¹ Since the dawn of time, humans have been taught to believe the existing predispositions embedded within our society. Holding particular attitudes to a decree, we have created a confined space—a box in which we exist to follow what has existed and what has been predestined. German philosopher Martin Heidegger has explained this phenomena in a matter of words. Describing the concept as, “the individual human experience to exist as if thrown into the world and molded to follow it, not conquer.” He describes this as thrownness or Geworfenheit. This ideology believes in collectivity and denies the probability of individualistic existence. We are born into this world to not break pre-existing rails that are set and laid for us to ceaselessly follow. We as humans, have no right to be bewildered with worldly affairs, for the audacious queries we ask see no fit, because our world works in a manner that is fixed, and we are merely meant to live in that manner where it sees us fit. We are condemned to be so-called, “freethinkers”.

² But what is a free thinker? They are considered as a rebel to established normality. An individual who rejects notions and opinions and instead makes decisions based on independent thought. A nonconformist—not bounded and chained to the strict unbending regulations that society has imposed. Unwilling to be under the impression of adhering to an oppressive force that challenges their autonomy. A freethinker is “enlightened” in the way they are aware and hypersensitive to the extremely troubled workings in which society operates on, which humans have independently developed for themselves.

³ It is comparable to Plato's allegory of the cave, where a freethinker can be seen as a prisoner who is freed from the cave, only to find out that their perceived reality of the superficial shapes projected unto the walls made by shadows is far different from the higher level of reality where the real, tangible objects exist. The freethinker is described to bear the “truth”, aware of the distorted and shallow understanding of reality.

THE REJECTION OF COLLECTIVISM

⁴ The freethinker inherently unfavors collectivism, seeing it as the antithesis of personal autonomy for representing the  conformity that they despise. They see it as a danger; a suppression of their individual thought. Collectivism often demands an adherence to pre-existing structures, shared beliefs, and goals, which leaves minimal room for the questioning or challenging of established systems. This directly conflicts with the freethinker’s interests and core identity, which is someone who values independent reasoning, self-determination, and nonconformity. For the freethinker, collectivism imposes a restrictive framework, obscuring the truths in which they independently follow. Melding reality into one homogenized understanding. 

⁵ Rejecting collectivism allows the freethinker to revel in the liberation of personal pursuits and seeking mystery. It is the liberty to enjoy the exploration of perspectives that are deviant from normative behavior and disruptive of traditional canons. For a freethinker, collectivism is not only viewed as an obstacle to enlightenment, creativity, and genuine understanding of the real world; it is a direct threat to their understanding of reality itself.

THE  ILLUSION OF TRUTH

⁶ Often, the freethinker becomes the antagonist. This antagonism stems from a fundamental tension: collectivism prioritizes unity and shared purpose, while freethinking elevates individual insight and skepticism. In no means does this explanation entail that a freethinker directly becomes a braggart, however, it is a consequence for those who feel “enlightened” to place a high degree in their personal idealisms and beliefs—manifesting and creating an imaginary hierarchy. They feel a weighed burden on their shoulders from bearing the “truth”. 

⁷ However, the “truth” that the freethinker holds in palm is not objective or universal; it is merely an ideological construct, which is individually developed and therefore, cannot be universally defined due to the inherently subjective nature of human perception. The truth is an ideology developed in the mind; vast, fluid, and subjective.

⁸ Philosopher Slavoj Žižek has defined ideology to be something more than what is merely considered ideas—it constructs a tangible framework used to approach and interact with the world—becoming reality itself. The “truth” that a freethinker holds becomes their own personal perception of reality itself, bending the pre-existing reality they perceive as falsehood into a newly shaped mold of a higher reality which they view realer and in a truer state.

⁹ Freethinkers may claim to hold a higher degree of understanding, but this too is merely another constructed belief system, no more universal than the societal norms they reject. It is to note that no human has ever conjured a true original thought. While this does not negate individualistic creativity or ingenuity, relation is inherent in human thought rather than isolation. Originality does not lie in creating ex nihilo (from nothing) but in reinterpreting, recombining, or questioning the existing frameworks we have in order to produce something. 

VIOLENCE AND CONDEMNATION

¹⁰ Violence has long existed, where humanity has not evolved highly enough to achieve its exact opposite, which is stable peace. There is only condemnation, evolving as an extapation of human instinct rooted from rationality and mixed with emotion. Humans have ingrained within their minds that there are no means and measures to see violence fit. It is a practice looked down upon, often equated to be “barbaric”, “cruel”, “savage”, and “inhumane”.  This condemnation however, does not erase its presence; rather, it urges a tendency to vilify what is inherent while failing to eradicate it entirely and effectively.

¹¹ The general irony lies within the historical presence of humanity's dependence on violence, utilizing it as a tool before the heightened  sense of guilt because of it even came to be part of the equation. Often rationalized as necessary for achieving specific goals, it is as if almost innate, for humans to use brute force and control for their own survival. 

¹² Contemporary society rejects the idea of violence; they institutionalize subtler forms, such as systemic oppression, economic exploitation, and political coercion. This contradiction reveals the hypocrisy of collectivism: societies condemn violence publicly while perpetuating it through their very structures. For the freethinker, violence is not merely physical but also systemic, embedded in the societal constructs, seeing them use force—whether overt or covert—to maintain order and suppress dissent. In this sense, violence becomes a tool pushing conformity, designed to protect the status quo. Thus, while society condemns violence as "inhumane," it also weaponizes it to silence those who question its authority.

¹³ The freethinker is in recognition of the fact that stable peace cannot be achieved through the means of suppression or condemnation alone. Instead, the underlying structures that breed violence are questioned for the hypocrisy of denouncing a brutality that is simultaneously depended on for survival; violence is not just an aberration but a reflection of humanity's failure to reconcile its instincts with its ideals.

THE FREE THINKER

¹⁴ In this sense, a clearer lens to understand the typical archetype of a mass shooter is provided. This is the philosophy of a “freethinker”. It is the rejection of societal predispositions in exchange of individualistic freedom. 

¹⁵ Mass shooters often adopt  "free thinking," distorting it to fit the ideology of exerting violence to rebel against societal constraints. They often reject the idea of collective moral standards, asserting their right to define their own rules and truths. In their view, violence becomes an instrument to assert individuality and challenge the rigid structure in which the world functions. Their rationale often hinges on the belief that societal predispositions—such as norms of civility and nonviolence—are arbitrary constructs that can be discarded if they are in conflict with personal grievances or desires. 

¹⁶ It is a distorted and destructive manifestation of the pursuit for autonomy, encapsulating the favor of an intensely personal and often nihilistic philosophy. For the mass shooter, violence becomes both not only a tool or mere instrument, it is a necessity, forged into a symbol—a means to reclaim their perceived lost power and rebel against structures they interpret as dehumanizing and have oppressed and further isolated them.

¹⁷ The freethinker often considers themself a  revolutionary. Rejecting the collective moral standard to condemn violence and fueling their ideology of acting upon violence to assert their existence and challenge the structures they believe deny their uniqueness and identity. This belief aligns with a warped interpretation where rebellion devolves into chaos and destruction.

¹⁸ The freethinker is in favor of chaos and destruction instead of stable peace because they perceive peace as a form of societal control, representing conformity that stifles independence. Chaos and destruction is the stark contrast, allowing the freethinker to dismantle structures they see as oppressive. By embracing chaos, the freethinker believes they are breaking free from a world that demands compliance, creating their own truth and therefore, becoming liberated. In their ideology, peace is not a path to freedom but a symbol of submission, making destruction and chaos a means to reclaim the autonomy they feel society has denied them.

CONCLUSION 

¹⁹ This pursuit of "freedom" is paradoxical. While the freethinker claims to reject the systemic oppression they face, their actions are rooted in the same mannerisms from the very systems they despise. Violence is a deeply ingrained human instinct. This means that their actions are not born from pure freedom but from a fundamental biological human instinct, as violence is an inherent, though suppressed, part of the human condition. By rationalizing violence as a means to disrupt societal norms, they inadvertently perpetuate cycles of harm and control, thus embodying the very dynamics of power they claim to oppose. For mass shooters, violence becomes a rationalized method to dismantle the structures they perceive as oppressive, ironically continuing the cycles they wish to overcome.

²⁰ This essay aims to highlight the dangerous interpretation of the philosophy of the freethinker. When distorted, it can provide a harmful justification for violence, which takes rejection and rebellion to its plain extremes, embracing chaos in the pursuit of freedom and liberty. Illustrating how individuals are able to exploit the concept to justify morally reprehensible actions. 

²¹ This pursuit of freedom is paradoxical, as it often results in the perpetuation of the same cycles of violence and oppression that the freethinker seeks to escape. Ultimately, the freethinker archetype reveals the fragile line between rebellion and destruction. There should be a fine distinction between challenging established systems and descending into chaos and harm. In the case of the freethinker, their rebellion is often born from a desire to break free from the constraints. Rebellion, in this sense, can be a legitimate response to injustice and a way of seeking change in an attempt to carve out personal freedom. 

²² However, the line thins when this rebellion shifts from merely challenging the system to actively destroying it. While the initial goal may be to free oneself from oppression, the means employed can inadvertently perpetuate the same same cycles one wishes to diminish. This is where the freethinker, in their pursuit of autonomy, can cross into destruction.

²³ Destruction here is not merely defined as dismantling societal norms, but it can involve the harming of others, disregarding ethical boundaries, and embracing chaos as a form of freedom. In such instances, the freethinker may justify extreme actions, such as mass shootings or other violent acts, as necessary for “breaking free”. This form of rebellion shows the delicate boundary between seeking autonomy and losing oneself in the pursuit of it, leading to harmful consequences rather than the desired liberation.

²⁴ In essence, the fragile line exists because, while rebellion has the potential to lead to positive change, when taken to extremes, can unravel into self-destructive acts, thus negating the original goal of freedom. The freethinker archetype highlights how the philosophy of rejecting societal norms can be distorted to justify heinous acts. By dismissing these norms without proposing an ethical alternative, the mass shooter transforms their rebellion against oppression into an oppressive act itself.

²⁵ Becoming what they have sworn to not become, or rather—what they have sworn to destory.

[funeral]

To [some of the existentialist writers] man is a being who, in all his cognitive acts and efforts, can never reach a real world. His world is but a design, projected by himself, and mirroring the structure of his being. Just as the kaleidoscopic observation depends on how the little pieces of glass have been thrown, this kaleidoscopic epistemology presents a ‘world design’ (Weltentwurf) wholly dependent upon man’s ‘thrown-ness’ (Geworfenheit) a simple reflection of his subjective condition and structure.

Viktor E. Frankl, The Feeling of Meaninglessness: A Challenge to Psychotherapy and Philosophy

[luxe-pauvre]

A pair of images that help clarify things here are those of the kayak and the superyacht. To be human, according to this analogy, is to occupy a little one-person kayak, borne along on the river of time towards your inevitable yet unpredictable death. It’s a thrilling situation, but also an intensely vulnerable one: you’re at the mercy of the current, and all you can really do is to stay alert, steering as best you can, reacting as wisely and gracefully as possible to whatever arises from moment to moment. The German philosopher Martin Heidegger described this state of affairs using the word Geworfenheit, or ‘thrownness’, a suitably awkward word for an awkward predicament: merely to come into existence is to find oneself thrown into a time and place you didn’t choose, with a personality you didn’t pick, and with your time flowing away beneath you, minute by minute, whether you like it or not. That’s how life is. But it isn’t how we want it to be. We’d prefer a much greater sense of control. Rather than paddling by kayak, we’d like to feel ourselves the captain of a superyacht, calm and in charge, programming our desired route into the ship’s computers, then sitting back and watching it all unfold from the plush-leather swivel chair on the serene and silent bridge. Systems and schemes for self-improvement, and ‘long-term projects’, all feed this fantasy: you get to spend your time daydreaming that you’re on the superyacht, master of all you survey, and imagining how great it’ll feel to reach your destination. By contrast, actually doing one meaningful thing today – just sitting down to meditate, just writing a few paragraphs of the novel, just giving your full attention to one exchange with your child – requires surrendering a sense of control. It means not knowing in advance if you’ll carry it off well (you can be certain you’ll do it imperfectly), or whether you’ll end up becoming the kind of person who does that sort of thing all the time. And so it is an act of faith. It means facing the truth that you’re always in the kayak, never the superyacht.

Oliver Burkeman, Kayaks and superyachts

[dreamingkitsunewrites]

Letter to somebody I left behind,

It's been more than a year…a year since you entered my life…and now that I've ripped myself away from you I'm slowly coming back to my old self… 

But I remember the hailstorm and us talking under the shelter of a balcony, the smell of your smoke on my skin, the intricate patterns of your tattoos

 I still remember Escher, Goya and the starless sky, the way we both hoped the rain wouldn't ever end…

 I remember the late night calls, when you couldn't even breathe on the other side of the line,but we still talked about the ultimate essence of happiness and Geworfenheit;

I know everything about you and I wish I didn't let you so close to me: I was never there, but in my mind I held your inner child out of the wreckage of your household…I never met Jo, but I feel like I was there beside you when you tried to bring him around in that car…I wasn't there with you that night, but I took all of your pain on my shoulders…

 I still remember the fights, the way you used to yell at me I was nothing without you… just to text me to know if I came home safe when I turned my back to you…

 I remember Budapest, your sore knuckles when life became too much, the way you finally fell asleep to the tale of my routine…

Even if I don't want to, I will always know the words of the songs you wrote to me, and I will always keep the notes you wrote in the books we exchanged.

I've tried… God knows I've tried…I've tried loving you even when u shattered me to pieces…not once but twice. And still then, I loved you from afar, without anyone else noticing. 

Sacrificing myself and my dreams on a far away horizon, I decided not to leave. Not yet -I said to myself. People asked me why I decided not to leave all of a sudden…and I wanted to play it down, blaming my lack of bravery, while the only reason was you…

But all you wanted was keeping me close just to see me shatter again…just for you to put me together and tear me to pieces over and over again… 

I gave you my time, my thoughts, my energy, my prayers… every fiber of my being begged for your Salvation as I held my own breath at night.

Yet, the cruel game you played with me was not enough: you kept on damaging yourself on purpose just because you knew it was the simplest way to get under my skin, to make sure in the end I would come back to you begging for more. 

Until one day I found the bravery to let go.

I want to leave you behind but I won't ever let you go completely, because deep,down I know I failed… I'll always be reminded how I couldn't get you out of your misery… I couldn't win over the Demons in your mind… 

You told me I reminded you of your mother…and I want nothing more than being someone else…

Good luck on your next turn, I wish someone will finally be able to stitch what the others had ripped apart…

Sorry if I moved on,

           Yours, the one who got away.

What a strange thing life is... Barely nights ago I was writing this letter in my drafts after getting a 3am text by a person I never thought I would hear from again...I layed awake feeling miserable, not wanting to feel a thing... and yet, today I grab lunch with friends I haven't seen in a while and I fall for the idea of falling in love again... The news of young (maybe too young) wedding after an almost breakup, and a new start after grieving the one you loved hit me like a train...it all happened in matter if minutes... And then I understood: Love knows a lot of hiding places...but when the time is right it will always find its way back to you...and I'm willing to wait, no matter how much long it will take...

Needed to get this off my chest so bad...

[omegaphilosophia]

The Philosophy of Dasein

The philosophy of Dasein is central to Martin Heidegger’s existential ontology, particularly in his influential work Being and Time (Sein und Zeit, 1927). Dasein, a German word often translated as "being-there" or "presence," refers to the unique way humans exist in the world. For Heidegger, Dasein is not just a synonym for human beings but describes the distinctive nature of human existence as an open, self-interpreting, and situated experience. Heidegger explores how Dasein’s nature as "being-in-the-world" involves a complex relationship with the world, others, and oneself.

Key Themes in Dasein Philosophy

Being-in-the-World: Dasein is fundamentally "in" the world, not as an object separate from it but as an active, engaged participant. This concept challenges traditional subject-object distinctions and emphasizes that human existence cannot be understood independently of the world and the context in which it finds itself.

Care (Sorge): For Heidegger, Dasein’s fundamental mode of being is care, which encompasses concern for both one's own life and the world around. This "care structure" is essential to Dasein, meaning humans inherently relate to their own potential and the world with care, responsibility, and involvement.

Being-toward-Death: Dasein has an awareness of its own finitude, making death a unique part of human existence. Heidegger argues that by confronting mortality, Dasein can live authentically, realizing the significance of its actions and decisions in the light of its temporal limitations.

Authenticity and Inauthenticity: Authenticity in Heidegger’s philosophy means fully realizing one's individual potential rather than conforming to societal norms or living according to the expectations of the "they" (das Man), which represents a collective, impersonal sense of being. Inauthenticity is the condition of simply going along with others, losing oneself in roles and societal pressures without making conscious, self-directed choices.

Thrownness (Geworfenheit): Heidegger describes Dasein as "thrown" into the world—into a particular time, place, culture, and set of circumstances it did not choose. This sense of thrownness highlights the constraints and givens that shape individual existence, which each person must confront and make sense of.

Understanding and Interpretation: Dasein constantly interprets itself and its world. Understanding is an interpretive act by which Dasein makes sense of its possibilities, world, and experiences. Heidegger sees interpretation as inherently part of what it means to exist, where self-knowledge is achieved not as static knowledge but as ongoing interpretation.

Temporality: Heidegger considers Dasein's existence as inherently temporal, unfolding through time and defined by past, present, and future. Temporality is central to Heidegger's analysis of Dasein, as understanding oneself and the world is a process that evolves and is influenced by the temporal flow of existence.

Philosophical Implications of Dasein

Existential Understanding of Self: Dasein redefines the self not as a static substance or identity but as an ongoing process of being. This perspective encourages individuals to see their identities as dynamic, shaped by choices, relationships, and the contexts in which they find themselves.

Ontology of "Being": Heidegger's inquiry into Dasein is ultimately a way to ask the question of Being itself: what it means "to be." By studying Dasein, Heidegger aims to reach a deeper understanding of Being as it applies to all entities, rather than just human beings.

Influence on Existentialism and Phenomenology: Heidegger’s concept of Dasein influenced existential philosophers like Jean-Paul Sartre, as well as the field of phenomenology, by presenting human existence as a fundamental, relational process rather than a detached, objective observer.

Ethical and Existential Responsibility: The philosophy of Dasein suggests that each person is responsible for living their life with awareness, authenticity, and acknowledgment of their own finitude. By becoming aware of the ways we are influenced by society, culture, and others, we can make more conscious choices and live in ways that are true to our own potential.

Influence on Psychology and Therapy: Dasein has also impacted existential psychology and psychotherapy, where understanding one's "being-in-the-world" is seen as key to personal growth, authenticity, and self-acceptance. Therapies that focus on existential themes often address the implications of death, freedom, and responsibility.

Critique of Modernity: Heidegger’s Dasein also reflects a critique of modern, technological societies, which he felt alienated people from more profound, meaningful ways of being. By focusing on efficiency, production, and standardized roles, modern life often pulls Dasein away from authentic existence, prompting Heidegger’s reflections on technology’s impact on human life.

[weirdchristmas]

This is what Heidegger calls Geworfenheit.

[therationalwanderer]

Ontologia do Isolamento

Comichão

No andar da vida cotidiana, lenta e maçante, e, portanto, contraditória; por isso mesmo, ainda mais insuportável, certos eventos despertam em mim aquilo que Sartre chamou de "n��usea": um sentimento agudo de que algo está errado, geralmente acompanhado de uma potente racionalização. Mas alguns eventos, que de início nem mesmo deveriam ser considerados eventos, assim tornam-se, por obra deste mesmo processo anteriormente descrito.

Algo familiar, absolutamente normal, cotidiano, tornou-se motor da minha mais recente reflexão. É assim que tem que ser. Heidegger reconhece o valor da vida cotidiana como primordial ao avanço da ontologia, ou estudo do ser enquanto ser. Portanto, tomarei uma parte considerável para descrever o tal evento, sendo esta descrição condição se-não para o entendimento do meu ponto aqui.

O fato

Saindo do trabalho, imerso em pensamentos, cruzei com um colega mais velho. Ele me chamou, e, após um breve cumprimento, começou a contar algo trivial: que costumava ir a uma padaria aberta à noite para tomar café e comer pão, algo de que gostava muito. Respondi com cordialidade, mas sem real envolvimento, e logo me despedi. Depois, ao vê-lo correndo para pegar o ônibus, senti uma enorme vontade de chorar. Percebi que ele havia compartilhado algo genuíno sobre si mesmo, enquanto eu, preso às minhas inquietações, o ignorei. Esse momento revelou minha dificuldade em me conectar e comunicar com profundidade, como se uma barreira invisível me isolasse. Havia eu perdido meu coração? Tive eu uma vez um?

Geworfenheit...

A conclusão mais óbvia e elegante que já li na filosofia se encontra em Heidegger: facticidade, ou basicamente o fato de que somos lançados a um mundo que nos antecede. Enquanto nos desenvolvemos neste mundo, lidando com um leque de situações limitadas e quase determinísticas que se defrontam conosco, aprendemos coisas, aprendemos a amar coisas, descobrimos coisas. Temos muito a comunicar, entretanto, a estrutura do que é ser simplesmente nos impede de comunicar toda a nossa riqueza interna, pois muitas das manifestações internas do ser satisfazem a condição de pré-predicado, pois:

1. Sequer temos consciência de algumas;

2. Temos consciência, porém parcial, tornando difícil o expressar;

3. Temos consciência e podemos expressar, mas as convenções sociais e significados externos e autoimpostos nos impedem.

Doce, amarga conclusão

"Em resumo, acredito que o ser lançado ao mundo possui, em sua ontologia, na sua condição enquanto ser, uma inseparável bagagem de formas que assumem-se como pré-predicados, sendo virtualmente incomunicáveis por barreiras fundadas na própria manifestação do ser e suas consequências."

Somos analfabetos das coisas do ser, tentando pifiamente comunicá-las ao mundo por meio de sistemas formais de linguagem; estes incapazes de abarcar nossos seres e transmitir a outrem. Seja por estarmos fundados demais nas suas próprias sombras, seja pela incomunicabilidade do pré-predicado de outrem, somos incapazes de qualquer tipo de comunicação real. É impossível assumir qualquer tipo de comunicação com o núcleo de outrem. Mesmo com o nosso núcleo, a empresa é demasiadamente grande.

Seu isolamento, sua solidão, em partes, é fruto de seu analfabetismo existencial. Mas todos nós temos isso, embora possamos fingir que não, seja para manter um relacionamento, para obter uma promoção ou vantagens na vida, todos temos. Cedo ou tarde, o abismo entre nós e aquele mais próximo mostra-se maior que a distância Terra-Nova Centauri. Você está sozinho no final.

[spugnaeros]

Geworfenheit

[chrisgrauegedanken]

Wer bist Du?

steht auf dem ersten Zettel den Sofie (Jostein Gaarder, Sofies Welt) im Briefkasten findet. Das Romanmädchen, das sich später zur Fiktion eines anderen Romanmädchens entwickeln wird, hat mit dieser Frage Probleme. Wer bist Du? Wer willst Du sein? Bist Du die, die Du sein willst?

Wir wurden in die Welt geworfen und sind zum Beispiel „Sofie“, ungefragt und unausweichlich. Die Geworfenheit (Martin Heidegger) der meisten Mitteleuropäer ist jedoch komfortabel, betrachtet man die vielen Krisengebiete auf der Erde.  Versuchen wir uns doch einmal in die Perspektive eines Bewohners aus aktuellen Kriegsgebieten oder Dürregebieten zu versetzen: wer bist du dann, und wie wünschst du dir die Optionen für dein Leben?

Freilich ist das schwer. Wir können uns eben sehr viel besser in die heile Welt Sofies, die Welt der schwedischen Wohngebiete versetzen, als in das kenianische Dorf aus dem Antonella, sechsjährig floh, nachdem sie mit einem sechzigjährigen „verheiratet“ wurde. Leider!

[ob-directory]

모더니즘의 질문은 무대에 ‘던져짐’으로써 하이데거가 “세상에 내던져져 있음(Geworfenheit)”이라고 표현한 생경함을 일깨운다. 로메오 카스텔루치가 연출한 공연 작품 「지옥」(2008)에서 둔탁한 공기의 파장을 일으키며 무대 바닥으로 가차 없이 내동댕이쳐지는 텔레비전 모니터들처럼, 무대에 ‘던져진’ 모더니즘의 화두들은 현실에서 공명한다. 지금, 이 순간.

서현석·김성희, 『미래 예술』

[korrektheiten]

☕️ Die Zugfahrt des Lebens🟥 Ein Ausschnitt aus Folge 9 des Formats. Was ist "Geworfenheit", "Kreatürlichkeit" und wieso...

M.S.: »☕️ Die Zugfahrt des Lebens 🟥 Ein Ausschnitt aus Folge 9 des Formats. Was ist "Geworfenheit", "Kreatürlichkeit" und wieso kann man das Leben mit einer Zugfahrt vergleichen? 📽 Auszug in HD ✅ Das gesamte Video (1h44) und eine Audioversion gibt hier für MSLive+ Mitglieder: MITGLIED WERDEN http://dlvr.it/SxZbMn « @MSLive_aut

[lavideenrose]

I stick my finger in existence — it smells of nothing. Where am I? Who am I? How came I here? What is this thing called the world? What does this world mean? Who is it that has lured me into the world? Why was I not consulted, why not made acquainted with its manners and customs instead of throwing me into the ranks, as if I had been bought by a kidnapper, a dealer in souls? How did I obtain an interest in this big enterprise they call reality? Why should I have an interest in it? Is it not a voluntary concern? And if I am to be compelled to take part in it, where is the director? I should like to make a remark to him. Is there no director? Whither shall I turn with my complaint?

From Repetition by Søren Kierkegaard

[perception-de-ambiguity]

[cedricjacquemyn]

Sculptural copper jackets reference liberty, A statue as a static representation of movement, an endless contradiction. The material will oxidise naturally over time. #cedricjacquemyn #handmade #geworfenheit #copperfabric #madeinbelgium #artisan #antifashion (at Cedric Jacquemyn Atelier Antwerp)

[wallacepolsom]

Wallace Polsom, Geworfenheit (2017), paper collage, 18.2 x 24.1 cm | shop.