previous | | 2.7.4 (159) | contents

Genders274.jpg


 High­-level oppositions from fig.56 now compose the X and Y axes of fig.57 (above). Unlike a Square favoring one primordial axis, a Plot can distribute terms asymmetrically to all four corners. We can track these metaterm pairs into the breakthrough of De Docta­ Ignorantia (On Learned Ignorance, 1440) wherein we find Cusanus at sea, contemplating his horizons—both real and ideal, phenomenal and intelligential. Firstly, he draws to 1 from 2: “the earth is indeed moved, even though we do not perceive this to be the case. For we apprehend motion only through a certain comparison with something fixed.” Second, from 3 to 1: “if someone did not know that a body of water was flowing [moving], how would he recognize that the ship was being moved?” Third, having triangulated, he generalizes at 1: “it would always be the case that if he were on the sun, he would fix a set of poles in relation to himself; if on the earth, another set; on the moon, [Mars,] and so on.” True—but to locate his argumentative basis, we must compare dynamics of motion to statics of situation: in fig.58 (over), we sort spatiotemporal term­-pairs according to the three standard (Aristotelian) existential quantifiers.

index | 2.7.5 (160) | | next

Genders275.jpg


 But as we ascend with Cusanus from singular to universal, we overstep our terms for categorial mediation. To retrace his surmise: as a mobile figure here, he first presupposes an immobile ground on which to stake his being; second, as a passive subject somewhere, he presupposes an active cause that ‘in itself’ escapes determinate coordinates elsewhere; third, his relatively moved viewpoint re­-centers ‘itself’ on—what?—fourth, an absolutely unmoved relation projected from 1 to 4: “it would always seem to each person (whether on the earth [etc.]) that he was at the ‘immovable’ center, so to speak, and that all other things were moved.” But does this not turn ‘now­-here’ into nowhere? From 4, Cusanus is either apt to fall to immobilized fixity at 2, or to invoke causa sui (self­-cause) in a self-mobilized viewpoint at 3, or, barring autonomic apotheosis, to presume an (Aristotelian) ‘Unmoved Mover’ returns him to 1 with all the other moved things: “Hence [fifthly], the world­-machine [i.e. cosmos or universe] will have its center everywhere and its circumference nowhere, so to speak; for [sixthly,] God, who is everywhere and nowhere, is its circumference and center.”

© 2008-2012 Ian C Thorne. all rights reserved. about credits privacy contact share