movement in Nausea
I'm reading the part in Nausea where Roquentin describes the
shivering of the tree, and I'm finding the subsequent explanation of
movement a little difficult to grasp. Here's my interpretation, could
you tell me where I'm going wrong?
- existence is not given birth to, or produced by transition. it
exists only in the exact present. it is not caused, but comes into
existence from nothing and back into nothing.
- movement exists and causes the shaking of the tree, but the tree is
obliterated and renewed with each passing moment in its new position.
So, does this mean that existants are completely unconnected to their
past/future selves, there are no causes? How can movement exist then
if it is essentially a cause that happens over time?