to "I think." "I think" refers to the I's self-certainty as in the Cartesian project, but "I speak" is distance, dispersion, effacing of existence. It is the outside and the disappearance of the speaking subject
who is less the responsible agent of discourse, but a "non-existence
in whose emptiness the unending of language uninterruptedly continues" ( Foucault 1990, 11).
It is this clandestine companion, whose subjectivity is a constant
withdrawing, whose voice we also hope to hear.
Maurice Merleau-Ponty, "An Unpublished Text," Arleen B Ballery
(tr.), in The Primacy of Perception,
James M Edie (ed.), ( Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1964), 8-9.
Cf. Exercises 336, where Ignatius writes, "It belongs to God alone to
give consolation without previous cause, for it belongs to the Creator to
enter into the soul, to leave it, and to act upon it, drawing it wholly to the
love of his Divine Majesty. I say, without previous cause, that is, without
any previous perception or knowledge of any object from which such consolation might come to the soul through its own acts of intellect and will."
In a chapter entitled, "...That Dangerous Supplement..." in Of
Grammatology, Derrida views the notion of "supplement" in Rousseau's
writing as "a sort of blind spot" around which his text is organised. "In
certain respects," he writes, "the theme of supplementarity is certainly no
more than one theme among others. It is in a chain.... But it happens that
this theme describes the chain itself.... [T]he concept of the supplement and
the theory of writing designate textuality itself in Rousseau's text... ( Derrida 1976,163). The notion of the "blind spot" finds its counterpart in transcendental thinking also. Lonergan, in Insight, A Study of Human Understanding, employs the notion of scotosis for the unconscious aberration which
occurs in human understanding, and the resulting blind spot a scotoma
( Lonergan 1958, 191-92).
One would want to argue, on the contrary, following Maurice
Blanchot's question on the nature of a fragment, that the great value of Rahner's work is the scattered and fragmentary nature of so much of it, and
the fact that he has turned away from an attempt at systematisation. (See Blanchot 1993, 307-14).
Vass, unfortunately, does not address the significance of vice-versa.
Rahner, "Thomas Aquinas on the Incomprehensibility of God," a
lecture delivered at the University of Chicago, Nov 8, 1974.
Levinas distinguishes ontology and metaphysics. Ontology, "a reduction of the other to the same by the interposition of a middle and neutral