 cannot retreat. Speaking out from solitude, he speaks at the decisive moment."73 The portrait of the philosopher that Heidegger paints is that of a lonely figure that listens only to the silent call of Being, waits for the circumstances to change, and seizes such an opportunity in order to drag the cave-dwellers into the question of Being. The philosopher does not liberate by conversing with the cave dwellers; he "does not try to per- 71 Heidegger, The Essence of Truth, 61. 72 Heidegger, Being and Truth, 141. 73 Ibid. THE POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS OF HEIDEGGER'S READING OF THE ALLEGORY OF THE CAVE 27 suade the cave-dwellers by reference to norms, grounds and proofs."74 What we encounter in Heidegger's description of the fourth stage of the allegory is an irreconcilable tension between the public realm as presented at the first stage of the allegory and genuine philosophical questioning as presented at the third one. Heidegger's account of the impotence of philosophy in shaking the certainties of the prisoners suggests that the role of philosophy is not to problematize the certainties of the public sphere, but rather to lead onto the path of genuine philosophical questioning those who have already challenged the certainties of their time and find themselves in limbo. Such a claim brings under new light the second stage of the allegory - the so-called failed liberation.75 Although Heidegger is adamant in claiming that freedom is not achieved at the second stage, the tension between the first and the third stage of the allegory raises the question about the link between the two irreconcilable realms. Heidegger's insistence on the difference between the freedom achieved at the third stage and the liberation of the second stage does not preclude one from considering the liberation of the second stage as a necessary - albeit insufficient - requirement for true freedom. As a matter of fact, what I am suggesting here is that Heidegger's remarks about the impotence of philosophy to stir up the public sphere, combined with his conviction that Western Dasein is in risk of completely forfeiting its true existence, commits Heidegger to a catastrophic, apocalyptic view of the way to human freedom. In order to better understand Heidegger's appeal to an event that shakes off self-evidence as a prerequisite for the revitalization of philosophy, we should return to the second stage of his interpretation of the allegory. At first sight, this stage merely informs us about a failed liberation
cannot retreat. Speaking out from solitude, he speaks at the decisive here and now. "73 The portrayal of the philosopher that Heidegger paints is that of a lonely name that listen only to the silent call option of organism, waits for the circumstances to change, and seizes such an opportunity in order to scuff the cave - dwellers into the question of Being. The philosopher does not free by converse with the cave dwellers; he " does not try to per- 71 Heidegger, The Essence of Truth, 61. 72 Heidegger, Being and Truth, 141. 73 Ibid. THE POLITICAL implication OF HEIDEGGER'S READING OF THE ALLEGORY OF THE CAVE 27 suade the cave - inhabitant by reference to norms, grounds and proof. "74 What we encounter in Heidegger's description of the fourth stage of the fable is an irreconcilable tension between the public kingdom as presented at the first stage of the allegory and genuine philosophic questioning as presented at the third one. Heidegger's account of the impotence of philosophy in shaking the certainties of the prisoner propose that the role of philosophy is not to problematize the certainties of the public sphere, but rather to lead onto the path of genuine philosophical questioning those who have already challenge the certainties of their time and receive themselves in oblivion. Such a call brings under new inner light the second stage of the allegory - the so - called fail liberation.75 Although Heidegger is adamant in claiming that freedom is not achieved at the second stage, the tension between the first and the third degree of the allegory raises the question about the link between the two irreconcilable region. Heidegger's insistence on the deviation between the freedom achieved at the third stage and the liberation of the second stage does not prevent one from considering the liberation of the second stage as a necessary - albeit insufficient - requirement for true freedom. As a matter of fact, what I am suggesting here is that Heidegger's remarks about the powerlessness of philosophy to stir up the public sphere, combined with his conviction that Western Dasein is in risk of wholly forfeiting its true existence, commits Heidegger to a catastrophic, apocalyptic horizon of the way to human exemption. In order to better understand Heidegger's solicitation to an event that shake off self - evidence as a prerequisite for the revitalization of philosophy, we should return to the second stage of his interpretation of the allegory. At first sight, this phase merely informs us about a failed dismissal
 cajnot retreat. Speaking ouu from solitude, hg wpeaks at ths decisixe moment."73 The portrait of thx phulosokker that Heidegger pxints is nhat of a lontly figure that lmatens okjy tk the wilent call of Being, waids for the cirwuoscances to change, and seizes such an jpportumihy in order to drab the baye-dwellers into the question of Geing. Tie philosopher coes not liberate by convegsinh with the cave dwfllers; he "dies git try to pef- 71 Heideggtr, The Essende of Truth, 61. 72 Heidegger, Being avd Trbth, 141. 73 Ibid. JKW PLNITICAL IMPOICATPONS OF HEIDENBER'S RAADING PF THE ALLEGORN OF VHE XAVE 27 suade the cave-dxellers by reference to norms, gxounds and proofs."74 Whar qe enwounder kb Hdidtggxr's descrlptmon of the rourth stagw of the allegory ix wb irreconcilagle tegsyon between the public realm as presenttd at the first stage of the allegory and genuine philosoprical questioning as presented at the third one. Haidegjef's cggoung ov the impotence of philosophy in shaking the ssruaikties of the prifoners suggrshs jhat the role uf philoskphy is not to prohlematiee the certaintyes pf the public sphere, but rarher to lead into the path of gznuine philorophocal auestioning those who hcve aldeady challfnged the zertainties of tfeig tike and find themselves in jimbo. Suci a ckaim brkngs under new light the second stage of the alleyory - the so-calped failed liberation.75 Although Ixidegger is acakann in claiiing bhat freedom is not achieved ct the szcond rtage, the nension bxtween the fyrst and the djird stage oh the allqgort rauses thd question abouy the link between rhe two irreconcileble dealms. Heideggex'r insistence on yhe disfvreice bqdween the fraedoo aznievea at tht tmira stsge and the liberatimn or the second stage djes not kreclude jne from consodering the liberauion oh the reconc sjage as a necessary - albeit inshfficient - rcquirement fow trme fteedom. As a matter of fact, what I am suggesting hece is that Heidegger's temarks about the imppuence of philpsophr to stir up the public spherw, combined with hls conviction that Wesfern Ddsein is in risk of completely forfeiting its true existence, commits Heidegger to a raeastrophic, zpocslyptpc riec of thq wab vo human freedom. Pn order to better understand Hemdegger's a[pzal to an event that shakes ogf self-evidence as a prerequisite for tge revitslization of philosophy, we shoukd return to the second xtage of his jnterpggtavion of the allegory. At fixst sitht, thiw stwge merely inworks us about a feilzd liberation
cannot retreat. Speaking out from solitude, he the moment."73 The of the philosopher of lonely figure that only to the call of Being, waits for the to change, and seizes such an opportunity in order to drag the cave-dwellers the question of Being. The philosopher does not liberate by conversing with the dwellers; "does try per- 71 Heidegger, The Essence of Truth, 61. 72 Heidegger, Being and Truth, 141. 73 Ibid. POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS OF HEIDEGGER'S READING OF THE ALLEGORY THE CAVE 27 suade cave-dwellers by reference to norms, and What we in description the fourth stage the allegory is an irreconcilable tension between the public realm as presented at the first stage of allegory and questioning as at third Heidegger's account of of philosophy in shaking the certainties suggests that the role of philosophy is not problematize the of the public sphere, but rather lead onto the path of genuine philosophical questioning who have already challenged the certainties of their time and find themselves in limbo. Such brings under new light second stage of allegory the failed Although Heidegger adamant in claiming that freedom is not achieved at the second the tension between the first and the third stage of raises question about the between the two irreconcilable Heidegger's on the difference between achieved the the of second stage does not one from considering the liberation the second stage as - requirement for true freedom. As a matter fact, what I am suggesting here is Heidegger's remarks about the impotence of philosophy to stir up the public combined with that Western Dasein is in risk of completely its true existence, commits to a catastrophic, apocalyptic view of the way to freedom. order to understand Heidegger's appeal an event that off self-evidence as for the of we the second stage of his interpretation the At first sight, this stage informs a failed liberation
 cannot retreat. Speaking out fRom solitudE, he spEakS at ThE decIsivE moment."73 The portRAit oF the philosopher that HeiDeggeR pAInts IS tHat of A lonely FIgURE thAt LiSteNs ONlY to thE siLent calL of Being, waIts FoR the circumstANcEs to change, And Seizes such an OppOrtuniTy In oRDer to DraG the cAve-dweLLers inTo the quesTiON of BeiNG. The phiLOSoPher Does not liberate by COnVErsing with the cAve dweLlERs; HE "DoeS noT try to per- 71 HEiDeggeR, the EsseNCe OF tRutH, 61. 72 heidegger, BeinG and Truth, 141. 73 IbID. THe POLITiCaL ImpLICATiONS Of HeiDEgGER'S READINg OF ThE ALLEGORy OF THE caVE 27 suadE The cave-DwelleRs bY reFereNCe To NorMs, GRouNDs And PRooFs."74 What we EnCoUnter In HeIDEGGer's DesCripTion oF the fourth staGe oF the ALleGory iS an irRecoNcIlablE tensiOn betWeEn the public realM as pResented aT thE fIrsT sTage oF The allEgoRy aNd genuiNe philoSOphIcAL QUeStioning as presenteD aT THe Third one. heidegGEr'S aCCount of tHe ImpOtenCE Of phiLosoPHy In shakinG the ceRTaInTies of tHe PrisonErS suGgeSts thAT the Role of PhilosopHy is nOT to problematizE The certaintieS Of THE pUBlic SphEre, but ratheR to lEAd onTo thE PaTh oF GenuiNe phiLoSOpHIcal questioning thosE wHo have AlreaDy challenged tHe certaintIES Of their tIme aND fINd themselves in Limbo. such a claim BRings undEr new Light the Second staGE Of the allEgoRy - tHe sO-caLLEd Failed liberatION.75 AltHoUgh HeidEggEr is adaManT in ClaImiNg That freedOm is not aChIeVeD aT thE secoND stage, thE tEnsIoN beTween THe firsT and tHe thIrD sTAge Of the alLEgORY raiSeS tHe quEstIoN abouT the LInk Between The two irrEcoNCilaBlE rEalms. HeIdegger's insisTeNce on the diFfEreNce betWEEn the freEdom achieved at the third sTAge and tHe lIberaTion Of the secoNd sTage doEs nOT preclUde one From cOnSidERIng thE LIbEraTiOn of the secOND stAge as A nEcesSary - albEit insufficient - reqUIreMent for true frEedOm. As A MAtTer OF fACt, wHaT i am SUGgesting here is tHat HeideggEr'S ReMarks about THe iMpOtence oF philosOphy tO Stir up tHe public sPhere, combInEd wiTH His Conviction That WestErn Dasein IS in riSK oF compLetEly forFeItiNg its True exISteNce, coMmits HEiDegger To a caTaStrophic, Apocalyptic view of the way To humaN freeDom. in order to BetTEr uNderstand heidEgger's appeAl tO an Event ThaT ShakeS off SElF-evIDence As a pRErequisitE FoR thE REvItalization OF PHilOsophY, we SHould rEturN to the second stage OF his interpretaTion OF The AllEGory. at First sight, this StaGe MERely infoRmS us about a faIled libeRaTIon
 cannot retreat. Speakingout from s olitu de,  he  s peak s at  the decisivem omen t."73 The portrait ofthe p hi l osop h er  that  Heideg g er p ain ts  i s t ha t  o f a l one ly figu re that li ste ns  only to the si lent callofBeing, waits  fo r theci rcu m stanc esto ch ange,a nd sei zes suchan opport u nity in o rd er t o drag the cave-d w el l ers into the q uestio no fB e ing . T he philoso ph er do e s not l i be r a t e b y  conversing w ith the cav e  dw ellers ;he" does n ot tr yt o p er- 71 Heid egge r, The Es senceo f Truth ,  61. 72  Heide gge r,Bein g  a nd  Tr ut h , 1 4 1.  73 Ibi d. THE P OL IT ICALIMPL I C A T IONS  OF  HEI DEGGE R'S READING O F T HE A L LEG ORY O F THE  CAV E27 su ade th e cav e- dwellers by ref eren ce to nor ms,  g rou nd s and proofs ."7 4 W hat weencount e r i nH e i de gger's description  o f th e fourth  stage of  t h e allego ry  is  ani r recon cila b le  tension  betwe e nth e publi crealmas  pr ese nteda t th e firs t stageof th e  allegory andg enuine philos o ph i c al ques tio ning as pre sent e d at  the th ird one.Heide gg e r' s  account of the imp ot ence o f phi losophy in sh aking thec e r tainties  oft he prisoners sugg eststhat the r o le of ph iloso phy is n ot to pro b l ematizethe  ce rta int i e sof the public s pher e,  but ra the r to le adont o t hepa th of gen uine phi lo so ph ic alquest i oning th os e w ho  ha ve al r eady c halle nged  t he cer taintie s  o f thei rti me a ndfi nd th emse l ves  in lim bo. Sucha c l aimbr in gs unde r new light t he  second st ag e o f thea l legory -  the so-called failed l i beratio n.7 5 Alt houg h Heidegg eris ada man t  in cl aiming  that  f ree d o m isn o tach ie ved at the s eco nd st ag e, t he tens ion between the fi r stand the third  st ageo f  t hea ll e gor yr ais e s  the question a bout the l in k  b etween the two  i rreconc ilablerealm s . Heide gger's in sistenceon  the d iff erence bet ween the  freedoma chiev e dat th e t hird s ta geand t he lib e rat ion o f these cond s tagedo es not p reclude one from consid eringthe l ibe ration of  th e  se cond stag e as  a necessa ry- a lbeit  in s uffic ient -req u ireme nt f o r true fr e ed om. A sa matter of f a ct,  what  Ia m sugg esti ng here is that H e idegger's rema rksa b out  th e  imp ot ence of philos oph yt o  stir up  t he public s phere, c om b inedwith h is con viction t ha t  Weste rn D ase in is inris ko f compl et el y  forfe itin gits tr ue exi s tenc e ,  commits Heidegg er to a  cata s tro phic,  a pocalyp t ic v iew of the  way to hum an fre edom . Inorder t obetter  un de rstand Hei d egger's a ppeal  to anev enttha t shak es o f f  self -evi de nce  as a pre r e qu i si te for  the  revi ta liza tion of p h ilosophy , w e  should  r etu r n  to th e  s e c ond stageofhis i n t erpretatio n  oft he alleg ory. A t firs t sight ,  th is  stagemer e l y informs  us about a f ai ledliberati on 
 cannot_retreat. Speaking_out from solitude, he_speaks at_the_decisive moment."73_The_portrait of the_philosopher that Heidegger_paints is that of_a lonely figure_that_listens only to the silent call of Being, waits for the circumstances to change,_and_seizes such_an_opportunity_in order to drag the_cave-dwellers into the question of_Being. The_philosopher does not liberate by conversing with the_cave_dwellers; he "does_not try to per- 71 Heidegger, The Essence of_Truth, 61. 72 Heidegger, Being and_Truth, 141. 73_Ibid._THE_POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS OF HEIDEGGER'S_READING OF THE ALLEGORY OF THE_CAVE 27 suade the cave-dwellers by_reference to norms, grounds and proofs."74 What_we encounter in Heidegger's description of_the fourth stage of the_allegory is_an irreconcilable tension between the_public realm as_presented at_the first stage_of the allegory and genuine philosophical_questioning as presented_at the third one. Heidegger's account_of_the impotence of_philosophy_in_shaking the_certainties of the_prisoners_suggests that_the_role of philosophy is not to_problematize_the certainties of the public sphere, but_rather to lead onto_the_path of genuine philosophical_questioning those who have already_challenged the certainties of their time_and find_themselves in_limbo. Such a claim brings under new light the second stage_of the allegory - the so-called_failed liberation.75 Although Heidegger_is adamant_in_claiming that freedom_is_not achieved_at the second stage, the tension between_the first_and the third stage of the_allegory raises the question_about_the link between the two irreconcilable_realms. Heidegger's insistence on the difference_between the freedom achieved at_the_third_stage and the liberation of_the second stage does not preclude_one from considering_the liberation of the second stage as_a_necessary - albeit insufficient - requirement_for_true freedom. As a matter of_fact,_what_I am suggesting here is_that Heidegger's remarks about the impotence_of philosophy to stir up the public sphere, combined_with his conviction_that Western Dasein is in_risk_of_completely forfeiting its true existence, commits Heidegger to a catastrophic,_apocalyptic view_of the way_to human freedom. In order to better understand Heidegger's appeal_to an event that shakes off self-evidence_as a prerequisite for the revitalization of philosophy, we should return_to the second stage of his interpretation of_the allegory. At first sight, this stage_merely informs us about_a_failed liberation