The subject is not a self which can be certain of itself as it could be certain of a fact. It is the scene of self-experience which proves to be the experience of inconsistency insofar as it experiences the lack of a stable self as the condition of possibility of itself. What I refer to as subject reaches into the abyss of the absence of essence, which proves to be the transcendental part in the form of the subject. The subject adumbrates the scene or stage of an elemental void, in relation to which each individual subject experiences its concretion. As if life meant to claim one’s singularity in the desert of a life-endangering universality, with the certainty that this self-assertion leads to no end. The subject as stage is not the subject of the stage, at least not primarily. We know the classical subject: it moves, sometimes as a dazzling, sometimes as a tattered protagonist on the stage of the theatre of its being, which is its life and reality. It is a central subject, in which all possible narrations accumulate. It provides them with a fundament and finality. This is how it orders the world according to its scales as an ontological instance of enabling, as transcendental subject. The subject of which I speak is nothing but this empty stage. There is no ontological primacy whatsoever of the subject to the world of facts and things. The subject itself is thing and fact. At the same time, however, it is a fact-thing which experiences the distance to itself, the chasm, which Derrida’s différance leads us to think as espacement. The only identity which remains for this “subject without identity”(Jacques Derrida) is to be the space between itself and itself, which I call stage space or scene of a controversial self-mediation without finality. The subject opens both upwards and downwards. It obeys neither an origin nor a teleology inscribed into such an origin. It is the name of the non-existence of telos and origin. In the subject, the experience of a twofold perforation condenses itself. It is the perforation of the ground on which it stands, in which it is grounded. It is furthermore the break through the horizon and the perforation of meaning, suspension of the ideology of advent and end. The subject is the feverish vector piercing from an undefined past into a nameless future. It moves between two indeterminacies: the indeterminacy of the future as well as of the past. It experiences itself as this in between, as some sort of indefinite presence. The presence of the subject is defined by the absence of a definable origin such as an horizon. The subject is the carrier of absence. It is a signifier of its own indeterminacy. It carries the indefinite by affirming itself as the intersection of finiteness and infiniteness: finiteness of its (concrete, organic, spatial-temporal) existence and infiniteness of ontological contingency, in which it remains hopelessly embedded.