In any event can we ever say there is a total disclosure? What would such a disclosure be anyway? Something close to Kant’s intellectual intuition? In our taking-to-be we presuppose a the world has a certain nature. This presupposition level shifts in time. Disclosure occurs within this horizon; the kinds of event that are possible are displayed from within this context. Something happens: a mug is knocked off the table and smashes on the floor. The baby knocked the mug off the table. A synthetic unity has purely occurred in a manner which is eventful. It has the disclosive sense of being-an-event. Its everyday reasonableness fits neatly into the world. We do not have to go far to see the edges though. If we stray even slightly we might note that this was our favourite mug and the baby is wont to have a dislike (in our interpretive home-world) for its colour or maybe this mug has a connotation unpleasant to someone. Did the baby break the mug deliberately? Did the some occult force break the mug through the baby? Psychoanalysis will sometimes entertain possibilities close to these. Did I break the mug through my subconsciously leaving it close to the baby -knowing its destructive potential- thus alleviating myself of whatever guilt the mug might harbour though it was my favourite… Probably the baby just ‘broke the mug’. The events significance can be reduced to a brief poor judgement and no more. Events do not harbinge anything else for they have no relation to anything but a endlessly complex and meaningless heterogeneity. Interpretation is made by the apophantic being. A relatively stable backdrop keeps such inanities in check; but does it correct them? No, for it cannot correct them, it can only hold them at bay until there disclosive time comes.
A woman is dying, I speak to her and discover this to be the case. I go outside and there is a single crow on top of my car. Immediately I might -owing to certain cultural connotations- make a unity of these. Is there a unity? Yes. Is the unity real? Yes. How do you know? I answer only the question as to the reality of the unity interpretively and not as if this proved reality really in itself somehow connected death and crows. No Jungian schema can guarantee this. But if I dwell even slightly in this world I struggle to utterly extirpate the occult possibility of a relation no matter how incoherent it might be.