The Question Concerning Technology - Revision history

Unknown user: /* Key Points */

2025-05-05T11:34:05Z

Key Points

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:34, 5 May 2025
Line 14:		Line 14:

	* '''Technology as a Mode of Revealing (Entbergen):''' The true essence of technology, for Heidegger, lies in its character as a way of "revealing" (aletheia in Greek, Entbergen in German). Technology fundamentally shapes how the world and truth are disclosed or unconcealed to us.		* '''Technology as a Mode of Revealing (Entbergen):''' The true essence of technology, for Heidegger, lies in its character as a way of "revealing" (aletheia in Greek, Entbergen in German). Technology fundamentally shapes how the world and truth are disclosed or unconcealed to us.
			** Also see [[After the Last Man]]

	* '''The Essence of Modern Technology: Enframing (Gestell):''' Heidegger identifies the essence of modern technology specifically as "Enframing" (Gestell). This is the most crucial concept. Enframing is a particular way of revealing that "challenges-forth" (herausfordern) nature. It demands that nature report itself as a calculable, orderable resource available for human use.		* '''The Essence of Modern Technology: Enframing (Gestell):''' Heidegger identifies the essence of modern technology specifically as "Enframing" (Gestell). This is the most crucial concept. Enframing is a particular way of revealing that "challenges-forth" (herausfordern) nature. It demands that nature report itself as a calculable, orderable resource available for human use.

Unknown user: /* Meditations */

2025-05-05T04:14:57Z

Meditations

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:14, 5 May 2025
Line 105:		Line 105:

	* '''Meditate on the Crisis of Perception:''' Reflect on the "crisis" Heidegger describes. How does focusing solely on the utility and function of technology prevent us from seeing its deeper essence (its "coming to presence" as Enframing)? Similarly, how does treating art merely aesthetically prevent grasping its essence as revealing?		* '''Meditate on the Crisis of Perception:''' Reflect on the "crisis" Heidegger describes. How does focusing solely on the utility and function of technology prevent us from seeing its deeper essence (its "coming to presence" as Enframing)? Similarly, how does treating art merely aesthetically prevent grasping its essence as revealing?
			** Focusing on Utility/Function Blinds Us to Enframing
			*** '''The Preoccupation:''' When Heidegger speaks of our "sheer preoccupation with technology", he means our tendency to focus exclusively on the technological – the machines, the devices, the processes, their efficiency, their usefulness, what they produce, how they solve problems, their economic or social effects. We are constantly asking: What does it do? How can we use it? How can we make it better (more efficient, faster, more powerful)?
			*** '''The Blindness:''' This focus on utility and function – the instrumental view – completely misses the essence of technology. For Heidegger, the essence isn't the machines themselves, but Enframing (Gestell). Enframing is the underlying way of revealing reality that characterizes the modern age. It's a mindset or orientation that challenges the world to present itself as nothing but standing-reserve (Bestand) – resources ordered, calculated, secured, and optimized for human control and use.
			*** '''The Consequence:''' By focusing only on what technology does (its function) and how we can use it (its utility), we remain blind to how it shapes our entire perception of reality. We don't experience its "coming to presence" as Enframing. We don't see that the very way we encounter nature, other people, and even ourselves is being framed by this logic of ordering and resource-maximization. We are caught within the frame, using the tools, without recognizing the frame itself or its profound impact on our way of being and understanding. We fail to see technology not just as tools, but as the dominant way truth (as ordered availability) is revealed in our age, potentially concealing other ways truth might appear.
			** Art Aesthetically Blinds Us to Revealing
			*** '''The Preoccupation:''' When Heidegger speaks of "sheer aesthetic-mindedness", he refers to the modern tendency to approach art primarily through the lens of aesthetics – focusing on its form, its beauty (or lack thereof), the subjective feelings or pleasures it evokes, its cultural value, its place in art history, or its role as self-expression.
			*** '''The Blindness:''' Treating art merely aesthetically, as an object for subjective experience or cultural analysis, prevents us from grasping its potential essence as poiesis – a unique mode of revealing truth (aletheia). In its essence, Heidegger suggests, art isn't just about pleasant feelings or skillful representation; it's a "bringing-forth" that can unconceal aspects of Being and reality that remain hidden from other approaches, like science or technology. It can gather a world into presence (like the Greek temple) or let truth shine forth in the beautiful.
			*** '''The Consequence:''' When we only engage with art aesthetically or as a cultural object, we "no longer guard and preserve [its] coming to presence" as this powerful mode of revealing. We reduce it to something for the subject (pleasure, analysis, status) rather than something that might disclose a truth beyond the subject. We miss its potential to challenge the technological worldview by offering a different way for reality and truth to appear – one that isn't necessarily based on calculation, utility, or control. Its essence as a site for the happening of truth gets lost behind the focus on subjective feeling or its classification as a cultural artifact.
			** The crisis lies in this double blindness. We are immersed in the products and effects of technology without understanding its world-framing essence (Enframing). Simultaneously, we often engage with art in a way that strips it of its potential to offer a counter-revealing (Poiesis), reducing it to subjective experience. Both stances prevent a "decisive confrontation" with the fundamental forces shaping our age. We are unable to truly grasp the danger inherent in technology's essence or to recognize and cultivate art's potential role as part of the "saving power" because we are stuck looking only at their surface functions or effects.



	* '''Meditate on Guarding Essence:''' What does it mean to "guard and preserve the coming to presence" of art? How might a different kind of attention or engagement be required, beyond mere consumption or subjective enjoyment, to keep its truth-revealing potential alive?		* '''Meditate on Guarding Essence:''' What does it mean to "guard and preserve the coming to presence" of art? How might a different kind of attention or engagement be required, beyond mere consumption or subjective enjoyment, to keep its truth-revealing potential alive?
Line 120:		Line 131:
	** '''Recognizing Art's Claim:''' Acknowledging that a great work of art makes a claim upon us, potentially challenging our usual ways of seeing and understanding the world. It requires a response beyond passive reception or subjective feeling.		** '''Recognizing Art's Claim:''' Acknowledging that a great work of art makes a claim upon us, potentially challenging our usual ways of seeing and understanding the world. It requires a response beyond passive reception or subjective feeling.
	** '''Resisting Immediate Instrumentalization:''' Refraining from immediately asking "What is this art for?" or "What can I get out of it?" in a utilitarian sense. Guarding its essence means allowing it to be in its revealing power, which might be disruptive or uncomfortable, rather than immediately harnessing it for subjective or societal purposes.		** '''Resisting Immediate Instrumentalization:''' Refraining from immediately asking "What is this art for?" or "What can I get out of it?" in a utilitarian sense. Guarding its essence means allowing it to be in its revealing power, which might be disruptive or uncomfortable, rather than immediately harnessing it for subjective or societal purposes.



	* '''Meditate on Deepening Mystery:''' Why does pondering the essence of technology (as a totalizing way of ordering reality) make the essence of art (as a different way of revealing) more mysterious? Does the stark contrast highlight the unique, perhaps non-utilitarian and non-calculable, nature of artistic truth?		* '''Meditate on Deepening Mystery:''' Why does pondering the essence of technology (as a totalizing way of ordering reality) make the essence of art (as a different way of revealing) more mysterious? Does the stark contrast highlight the unique, perhaps non-utilitarian and non-calculable, nature of artistic truth?

Unknown user: /* Meditations */

2025-05-05T04:08:50Z

Meditations

@@ Line 120: / Line 120: @@
 ** '''Recognizing Art's Claim:''' Acknowledging that a great work of art makes a claim upon us, potentially challenging our usual ways of seeing and understanding the world. It requires a response beyond passive reception or subjective feeling.
 ** '''Resisting Immediate Instrumentalization:''' Refraining from immediately asking "What is this art for?" or "What can I get out of it?" in a utilitarian sense. Guarding its essence means allowing it to be in its revealing power, which might be disruptive or uncomfortable, rather than immediately harnessing it for subjective or societal purposes.
 * '''Meditate on Deepening Mystery:''' Why does pondering the essence of technology (as a totalizing way of ordering reality) make the essence of art (as a different way of revealing) more mysterious? Does the stark contrast highlight the unique, perhaps non-utilitarian and non-calculable, nature of artistic truth?
 {{Quote|

Unknown user: /* Section 1 - The Question Concerning Technology */

2025-05-05T04:01:08Z

Section 1 - The Question Concerning Technology

@@ Line 70: / Line 70: @@
------
+===Meditations===
 {{Quote|
@@ Line 105: / Line 105: @@
 * '''Meditate on the Crisis of Perception:''' Reflect on the "crisis" Heidegger describes. How does focusing solely on the utility and function of technology prevent us from seeing its deeper essence (its "coming to presence" as Enframing)? Similarly, how does treating art merely aesthetically prevent grasping its essence as revealing?
 * '''Meditate on Guarding Essence:''' What does it mean to "guard and preserve the coming to presence" of art? How might a different kind of attention or engagement be required, beyond mere consumption or subjective enjoyment, to keep its truth-revealing potential alive?
 * '''Meditate on Deepening Mystery:''' Why does pondering the essence of technology (as a totalizing way of ordering reality) make the essence of art (as a different way of revealing) more mysterious? Does the stark contrast highlight the unique, perhaps non-utilitarian and non-calculable, nature of artistic truth?

Unknown user: /* Section 1 - The Question Concerning Technology */

2025-05-05T03:51:55Z

Section 1 - The Question Concerning Technology

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:51, 5 May 2025
Line 68:		Line 68:

	This famous Hölderlin quote, adopted by Heidegger, points to the idea that the essence of technology (Enframing), while being the supreme danger, simultaneously holds within itself the possibility of salvation or a turn toward a more authentic relationship with Being.		This famous Hölderlin quote, adopted by Heidegger, points to the idea that the essence of technology (Enframing), while being the supreme danger, simultaneously holds within itself the possibility of salvation or a turn toward a more authentic relationship with Being.


			-----

			{{Quote\|
			Because the essence of technology is nothing technological, essential reflection
			upon technology and decisive confrontation with it must happen in a
			realm that is, on the one hand, akin to the essence of technology and, on the
			other, fundamentally different from it.
			}}

			* '''Meditate on Essence vs. Manifestation:''' Contemplate the difference between "technology" (as Enframing, a way of revealing reality as controllable standing-reserve) and the "technological" (the machines, devices, systems). Where does this non-technological essence show itself in your experience of the world, beyond specific gadgets?

			* '''Meditate on Akin but Different:''' Ponder what kind of realm could be akin to technology's essence (perhaps in being a fundamental way reality is revealed or shaped) yet fundamentally different in its nature (perhaps non-calculating, non-objectifying, not aimed at control). What qualities would such a realm need?

			* '''Meditate on the Necessity of Another Realm:''' Reflect on why a truly "essential reflection" or "decisive confrontation" cannot happen solely within the terms and logic set by technology itself. Why must we step outside the technological mindset to truly understand it?

			{{Quote\|
			Such a realm is art. But certainly only if reflection on art, for its part, does
			not shut its eyes to the constellation of truth after which we are ''questioning''.
			}}

			* '''Meditate on Art as Revealing:''' Consider art not just as aesthetics or self-expression, but as poiesis – a "bringing-forth" from concealment into unconcealment. How might creating or experiencing art reveal aspects of reality or truth that the technological mindset obscures? Recall an experience with art that felt like a revelation.

			* '''Meditate on the Condition:''' Reflect on the crucial condition Heidegger places: reflection on art must remain open to the "constellation of truth" (the way Being reveals and conceals itself). How might modern approaches to art (as commodity, entertainment, pure subjective feeling) cause it to "shut its eyes" to this deeper, truth-revealing potential?

			* '''Meditate on Art's Kinship and Difference:''' How is art's revealing (bringing-forth) akin to technology's revealing (challenging-forth)? Both unconceal. How are they fundamentally different in their relationship to what is revealed (e.g., letting-be vs. ordering-for-use)?

			{{Quote\|
			Thus questioning, we bear witness to the crisis that in our sheer preoccupation
			with technology we do not yet experience the coming to presence of technology,
			that in our sheer aesthetic-mindedness we no longer guard and
			preserve the coming to presence of art. Yet the more questioningly we ponder
			the essence of technology, the more mysterious the essence of art becomes.
			}}

			* '''Meditate on the Crisis of Perception:''' Reflect on the "crisis" Heidegger describes. How does focusing solely on the utility and function of technology prevent us from seeing its deeper essence (its "coming to presence" as Enframing)? Similarly, how does treating art merely aesthetically prevent grasping its essence as revealing?
			* '''Meditate on Guarding Essence:''' What does it mean to "guard and preserve the coming to presence" of art? How might a different kind of attention or engagement be required, beyond mere consumption or subjective enjoyment, to keep its truth-revealing potential alive?
			* '''Meditate on Deepening Mystery:''' Why does pondering the essence of technology (as a totalizing way of ordering reality) make the essence of art (as a different way of revealing) more mysterious? Does the stark contrast highlight the unique, perhaps non-utilitarian and non-calculable, nature of artistic truth?

			{{Quote\|
			The closer we come to the danger, the more brightly do the ways into the
			saving power begin to shine and the more questioning we become. For questioning
			is the piety of thought.
			}}

			* '''Meditate on Danger Revealing Salvation:''' Contemplate the paradox: how can moving closer to the danger (recognizing the full extent of technology's enframing power and its threat to Being) simultaneously illuminate the "saving power"? Is the awareness of the danger itself the first step toward an alternative?
			* '''Meditate on Becoming More Questioning:''' Reflect on the experience of "becoming more questioning." What does it feel like to dwell in uncertainty about technology's ultimate meaning and art's potential, rather than settling for easy answers? How does this openness relate to potential "ways into the saving power"?
			* '''Meditate on Questioning as Piety:''' Consider "questioning" not as finding factual answers, but as "piety" – a dedicated attentiveness and responsiveness to the fundamental mysteries of existence (like Being, truth, the essence of technology and art). How can maintaining the questioning stance be a form of deep respect for that which is truly worthy of thought?

	==Section 2 - The Turning==		==Section 2 - The Turning==

Unknown user: /* Misc */

2025-05-05T03:47:25Z

Misc

@@ Line 314: / Line 314: @@
 we remain held fast in the will to master it. We press on past the essence
 of technology
 }}

Unknown user: /* Section 4 - The Age of the World Picture */

2025-05-05T03:46:15Z

Section 4 - The Age of the World Picture

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:46, 5 May 2025
Line 196:		Line 196:

	This quote clarifies the central concept of "world picture" (Weltbild). It's not merely an image of the world, but signifies the modern way of grasping the world as an image, something set up and represented by man.		This quote clarifies the central concept of "world picture" (Weltbild). It's not merely an image of the world, but signifies the modern way of grasping the world as an image, something set up and represented by man.

			Digging deeper: what does Heidegger actually mean by this?

			The following statement is central to Heidegger's analysis of the modern age in "The Age of the World Picture." He's making a subtle but profound distinction.

			{{Quote\|
			Hence world picture, when understood essentially, does not mean a picture of the world but the world conceived and grasped as picture
			}}

			This is beyond mere visual image. When Heidegger talks about the "world picture," he's not primarily talking about paintings, photographs, or literal visual representations of the world. While those can be symptoms or expressions of the underlying phenomenon, the core idea is much deeper. It concerns the fundamental way Being (what it means "to be") is understood in the modern era.

			To grasp the world as picture means:

			# '''The World as Object of Representation (Vorstellung):''' The world, in its entirety, ceases to be something that primarily reveals itself to humans on its own terms (as Heidegger might argue was the case for the ancient Greeks). Instead, the world becomes something that stands over against man (as subject), waiting to be represented, depicted, analyzed, and controlled. Its reality, its very being, becomes equated with its ability to be represented by and for the human subject. Think of mapping the globe entirely, cataloging all species, analyzing all historical events – bringing everything before the representing subject.
			# '''Man as the Subject/Framer:''' This shift is intrinsically linked to man taking the position of the subject (subiectum) – the underlying ground, the center to which everything is related. Man becomes the one who "gets the picture," who sets the stage, draws the boundaries, and determines the rules for how reality is allowed to appear. Reality is, in essence, what can be framed within human understanding and technical capacity.
			# '''System and Calculability:''' The "picture" implies coherence, order, and structure – a system. The world grasped as picture is seen as a system that can, in principle, be fully understood, calculated, predicted, and manipulated through scientific procedure, technological intervention, and rational planning. Everything is interconnected in a way that is, ideally, surveyable and controllable by the subject.
			# '''Availability and Setting-in-Place:''' The world-as-picture is the world "set in place before oneself". It's a world made available, put at the disposal of the human subject for investigation, exploitation, and reconfiguration. This connects strongly to the concept of "standing-reserve" (Bestand) from "The Question Concerning Technology," where everything is on call, ordered for use.

			How this relates to AI:

			* Modeling as Picture-Making: Much of AI, particularly machine learning, functions by creating models of the world (or specific aspects of it) based on vast amounts of data. These models are essentially complex, dynamic "pictures" – representations that capture patterns and relationships. The AI "grasps" reality as the picture generated by its algorithms.

			* Datafication and Objectification: AI often requires reality to be translated into data points – objectified – before it can be processed. Phenomena (language, images, human behavior, natural processes) are made calculable and manipulable by being represented as data within the AI's framework. This aligns with the world being "set up by man" (through the AI systems he designs) to be represented.

			* Prediction and Control: AI models are often built for prediction and control, aiming to make the future calculable based on the "picture" derived from past data. This reflects the modern drive for certainty and mastery inherent in the world-picture concept.

			* Generative AI: Technologies like large language models (LLMs) or diffusion models for images internalize a statistical "picture" of language or visual reality and then generate new instances that conform to that picture. They are masters of representation, operating entirely within the logic of the world grasped as a representable, reproducible system.

			Tie this in with modern technology:

			* In essence, while Heidegger wrote "The Age of the World Picture" before the advent of widespread digital technology, the Internet, VR, and AI exemplify the culmination of the tendencies he identified. They provide powerful means to represent, simulate, calculate, and manipulate reality, reinforcing the modern metaphysical stance where the world's Being is equated with its capacity to be pictured, objectified, systematized, and brought under the purview and control of the human (or increasingly, artificial) subject.


	On Man Becoming Subject:		On Man Becoming Subject:

Unknown user: /* Section 4 - The Age of the World Picture */

2025-05-05T03:38:48Z

Section 4 - The Age of the World Picture

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:38, 5 May 2025
Line 212:		Line 212:

	This explicitly links the two core events Heidegger sees as defining modernity, stating they are interconnected aspects of a single fundamental transformation in the understanding of Being, truth, and humanity's place.		This explicitly links the two core events Heidegger sees as defining modernity, stating they are interconnected aspects of a single fundamental transformation in the understanding of Being, truth, and humanity's place.

			==Section 5 - Science and Reflection==

			On the Essence of Modern Science as Theory of the Real:

			{{Quote\|
			Science is the theory of the real. [...] Theory as observation [Betrachtung] would be an entrapping and securing refining of the real
			}}

			This establishes the essay's definition of modern science, linking it to "theory" understood not just as passive observation but as an active "striving after" (trachten) that entraps, secures, and refines reality into objects.

			On the Limits of Scientific Objectification:

			{{Quote\|
			Scientific representation is never able to encompass the coming to presence of nature; for the objectness of nature is, antecedently, only one way in which nature exhibits itself.
			}}

			This quote points out that the way science renders nature (or any reality) into an "object" is only one specific mode of revealing, which necessarily cannot capture the full "coming to presence" (essence) of the phenomenon itself.

			On Science's Inability to Grasp Its Own Essence:

			{{Quote\|
			Physics as physics can make no assertions about physics. All the assertions of physics speak after the manner of physics. Physics itself is not a possible object of a physical experiment.
			}}

			This illustrates a key limitation: a science, operating within its own methods and object-area, cannot use those same methods to investigate or define its own fundamental nature or essence.

			On the Inconspicuous State of Affairs (The Unthought Ground of Science):

			{{Quote\|
			The state of affairs that holds sway throughout the essence of science [...] is that which is inaccessible and not to be gotten around, which is constantly passed over.
			}}

			This refers to the underlying reality (nature, history, language, etc.) that science investigates but can never fully encompass (the "not-to-be-gotten-around") and which is "inaccessible" to science's methods. This ground is "constantly passed over" precisely because science cannot scientifically grasp it.

			On Reflection (Besinnung) as a Different Kind of Thinking:

			{{Quote\|
			Reflection is more [than consciousness]. It is calm, self-possessed surrender to that which is worthy of questioning.
			}}

			This defines "Reflection" (Besinnung) not as scientific calculation or cultural activity, but as a distinct way of thinking characterized by a meditative surrender to fundamental questions, potentially allowing access to the "inconspicuous state of affairs" that science passes over.

	==Misc==		==Misc==

Unknown user: /* Section 3 - The Word of Nietzsche - God is Dead */

2025-05-05T03:26:33Z

Section 3 - The Word of Nietzsche - God is Dead

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:26, 5 May 2025
Line 170:		Line 170:

	In short: Nietzsche tried to cure the illness (nihilism as loss of old values) with a medicine (value-thinking based on Will to Power) that Heidegger diagnosed as the most advanced stage of the underlying disease (metaphysics' forgetting of Being itself).		In short: Nietzsche tried to cure the illness (nihilism as loss of old values) with a medicine (value-thinking based on Will to Power) that Heidegger diagnosed as the most advanced stage of the underlying disease (metaphysics' forgetting of Being itself).


	~~Sources and related content~~

	==Section 4 - The Age of the World Picture==		==Section 4 - The Age of the World Picture==

Unknown user: /* Section 3 - The Word of Nietzsche - God is Dead */

2025-05-05T03:23:50Z

Section 3 - The Word of Nietzsche - God is Dead

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:23, 5 May 2025
Line 152:		Line 152:

	This highlights Heidegger's critical interpretation. While Nietzsche saw his value-thinking based on the will to power as overcoming nihilism, Heidegger argues that interpreting Being as value is itself the ultimate form of nihilism because it obscures the question of the truth of Being itself.		This highlights Heidegger's critical interpretation. While Nietzsche saw his value-thinking based on the will to power as overcoming nihilism, Heidegger argues that interpreting Being as value is itself the ultimate form of nihilism because it obscures the question of the truth of Being itself.

			Nietzsche's Perspective:

			* What Nietzsche saw as Nihilism: For Nietzsche, as interpreted by Heidegger, nihilism was primarily the historical event where the "highest values" – God, the suprasensory world, moral laws derived from that realm – lost their authority and power. This led to a sense of meaninglessness, a state where the guiding "Why?" of existence went unanswered.
			* Nietzsche's Solution – Revaluation: Nietzsche didn't want to simply replace old values with new ones within the same old structure (which he called "incomplete nihilism"). His radical solution was a "revaluation of all values" based on a new principle.
			* The New Principle – Will to Power: He identified the fundamental reality of everything ("the innermost essence of Being") as the Will to Power – an unending drive for self-overcoming, growth, and mastery.
			* Values Grounded in Will to Power: In this new framework, values are no longer transcendent ideals. Instead, they are "conditions of itself posited by the will to power" for its own preservation and, more importantly, enhancement. What promotes the Will to Power is valuable; what hinders it is not.
			* Overcoming Nihilism: By grounding values in the Will to Power (which he saw as affirming life and the earth, rather than a denying suprasensory realm), Nietzsche believed he was providing a new foundation for meaning and thus overcoming the nihilism caused by the death of the old values.

			Heidegger's Perspective:

			* Heidegger's Different Question: Heidegger steps back further than Nietzsche. His primary concern is not just the loss of values or finding a new principle for them, but the fate of Being itself (Sein) throughout the history of Western metaphysics. He argues that metaphysics has consistently thought about beings (Seiendes – things that exist) but has forgotten or failed to adequately question Being itself – what it means "to be," how Being reveals and conceals itself (the "truth of Being").
			* The Problem with "Value": When Nietzsche interprets the fundamental reality (Will to Power, which functions as Being in his metaphysics) and indeed everything in terms of "value," Heidegger sees a profound problem. To call something a "value" inherently means it is being assessed or posited based on its worth for something else (in Nietzsche's case, for the Will to Power's self-preservation and enhancement).
			* Being Degraded: Heidegger argues that when Being itself (or its metaphysical stand-in, like the Will to Power) is interpreted as a value, even the "highest value," it is fundamentally degraded. It's no longer considered in its own light, in its own appearing and withdrawing (its truth). Instead, it becomes merely a condition posited by and for the sake of something else (the willing subject, the Will to Power). It is instrumentalized, even if on a metaphysical scale.
			* Obscuring the Truth of Being: This "value-thinking," for Heidegger, is the ultimate expression of the "forgetting of Being." By defining Being's worth in terms of its utility or function as a value, it completely shuts down the more fundamental question: What is the truth of Being itself? How does Being presence and absence? The question seems already answered: Being is its value. This prevents any deeper inquiry.
			* Consummation of Nihilism: Therefore, while Nietzsche thought he was overcoming nihilism (loss of values) by establishing a new value system based on the Will to Power, Heidegger sees this move as the consummation or ultimate form of nihilism. Why? Because this value-thinking represents the most complete and final stage of metaphysics' forgetting of Being. It's the point where Being itself is entirely absorbed into the framework of calculation, positing, and utility, thereby definitively obscuring any path toward thinking the truth of Being itself. The "Nothing" in nihilism, for Heidegger, ultimately refers to the absence or forgottenness of Being itself.

			In short: Nietzsche tried to cure the illness (nihilism as loss of old values) with a medicine (value-thinking based on Will to Power) that Heidegger diagnosed as the most advanced stage of the underlying disease (metaphysics' forgetting of Being itself).


			Sources and related content

	==Section 4 - The Age of the World Picture==		==Section 4 - The Age of the World Picture==