I have discovered the works of Martin Heidegger.
Of course, I had read the small book on the concept of being and not-being, about "on kai me on", a long time ago and thought it more philologic than philosophic, and drew no vasty deep conclusions from it.
Now the real deal cometh.
First, I wonder why so little that is life-enriching in Heidegger is emphasized in the modern day. There are extensive forests of wood devoted to Deconstruction, but I find that concept to be of comparatively little interest.
Second, I find that Heidegger has much in common with scientists and philosophers of science who are trying to clarify the foundations of quantum theory.
In this we read:
Fuchs calls this approach quantum Bayesianism... because he believes that... probabilities – including quantum probabilities – “are not real things out in the world; their only existence is in quantifying personal degrees of belief of what might happen.” This view, he says, “allows one to see all quantum measurement events as little ‘moments of creation’, rather than as revealing anything pre-existent.”There is a great Cartesianism still in the view of observer as creator, but there is also a awareness of revelation in a I-You relation rather than an I-It. There is no detection of a pre-existing It by a pre-existing Me.
The little moment of creation refers to a new awareness or knowledge, I think.
I hate Cartesianism.
In honor of Fidel, recently gone to the Pantheon, I paraphrase:
And I promise I shall not throw a lot of Heidegger-Stoff (Heidegger stuff) into the old blog and make things uncomfortable, because philosophy taken raw - as it were - can cause one to "swoon... or simulate a throw".