How can we place sidedness before appearing?
Let's try to think of throughness as four-dimensional, as temporally and spatially ex-tended. (Is this starting off on the wrong foot? Could we simply say that we want to imagine throughness as having to do with temporality and not mean something like see it as being extended through (ahem) time?) Does throughness have its sidedness, its hithers and yons, befores and afters? Does throughness pass through its own sidedness?
Can we think passage thoroughly without thinking it phenomenologically?
Henry, If I read him correctly, makes an argument for the transcendence of Life, which we glimpse in passing: "What does 'passing' signify if everything is here and does not cease to be here in the indissoluble bond of self-affection to itself, if what passes does not separate from itself, if what passes is life remaining in itself?" As I see it this thought is contradictory as long as Life is imagined to be invisible, as beyond appearance and therefore beyond sidednessbut I put forward this idea as a question because it appears as if serious thinkers (as Henry surely was) may be putting sidedness forward before phenomenality, and therefore transcendence before phenomenality, and I reckon there must be reasons for that, or some angle on it that I am not seeing.