beyond? horizon, immanence, and transcendencehow horizon is horizon, we can ask whether our understanding of the
world does not take the form of a double in-finite movement: a tran-
scendence of time in time.^9
The movement of immanence is also a movement towards im-
manence. This can be seen in Nietzsche. In order to affirm this world
as immanence transcendence is required. But there is more to it. The
question of horizon and transcendence can be raised from within, tak-
ing our point of departure in Nietzsche’s critique of the metaphysics
of two worlds. The radical significance of the death of God is measured
in terms of horizon: as our horizon of orientation disappearing. We
are facing “Horizontlosigkeit.” Yet, this loss of horizon is in itself
something that happens to us. It opens up the world as a world of
infinite interpretations. The death of God means that interpretations
are set free. This “event” can be seen as an opening of horizon. Thus,
the paragraph preceding § 125 on the death of God in Die fröhliche
Wissenschaft bears the title: “Im Horizont des Unendlichen.” The
event of setting interpretations of the world free does not mean that
we now set the stage. On the contrary, we are not just looking out at
the open sea: we are ourselves situated at the open sea, in the horizon
of the infinite. This is frightening. Not only because we now have to
project ourselves anew, but also because we are situated in a world of
an infinity of perspectives. The world is not just open for our interpre-
tations; it also escapes us as infinitely interpretable. This infinity is not
so much infinite possibilities at our disposal as an infinity that im-
poses itself upon us, overwhelms us, and makes us without ground,
travelling in life at the open sea (as we do also according to Kierke-
gaard). Thus, transcendence takes place in the horizon of the infinite
imposing itself upon us. The fact that we cannot escape interpreting
the world does not turn the world into our interpretation. On the
contrary, as a world of interpretations it escapes us.^10
- For this suggestion, cf. my “Zeit und Transcendenz,” in Der Sinn der Zeit, eds.
Emil Angehrn, et al., Weilerswist: Velbrück, 2002, 40–52, discussing Michael
Theunissen, Pindar. Menschenlos und Wende der Zeit, München: C.H. Beck, 2000. - To this all too brief section cf. my “Jenseits? Nietzsches Religionskritik Revis-
ited,” Nietzsche-Studien 34, 2005, 375–408, and “Im Horizont des Unendlichen.
Religionskritik nach Nietzsche,” in Kritik der Religion, eds. Ingolf U. Dalferth and
Hans-Peter Grosshans, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006, 145–162.