The Totalization of Shadows, Part XIII

I’m reflecting on the way I have retained the concept of Totalization, in part a continuing tribute to Carl’s original theory of the Enlightenment, the exact formulation from which I am breaking away.

As I’ve mentioned before, I don’t want to break away from the elements of Carl’s theory, (Totalization being one such element,) I want to separate these elements and then reassemble them somehow, with the reassembly being determined by which way accomplishes a reactivation of philosophical ethos.

I am almost certain Totalization is a feature in a landscape or field of features which bear upon the problems at hand. Totalization one way or other means "thinking is over," finished. Totalization means this, but more importantly, Totalization does this. (I have to return to this distinction, which in certain ways is a false one--false AND important.)

There are only three things I wish to mention in this regard:1) it’s not the only feature;2) its way of acting on reactivation are multiple; 3) its actions on reactivation must not be understood as negative, negating. (By this I mean to say however Totalization acts on reactivation, it doesn’t eradicate, eliminate, or completely destroy reactivation, and might facilitate reactivation in certain ways if those ways can be determined.)

Together, these considerations help to prevent me from entering into the fatal trap of having my overcoming (overcoming used as a first approximation for what I am attempting--I apologize because this first approximation is somewhat misleading) of Totalization becoming a Totalization. They help my own thinking from being over.