Note: This is still rough
In a solid reality without space or time and with entities which are
not separate but which do have distinction and which move and therefore
change relative position, the issue of Being is somewhat problematic. Does
any one particular entity really have being or is there just one thing which
is everything. However, in order to make distinctions, we must say that
specific things "are", and it is in the distinctions between things
that meaning arises. In a sense it is absolutely correct to say that something
is what it is and because it is; but that is defining something in its own
term (tautological) and essentially a meaningless statement. So what if
something is - what does it do? what are is attributes? what is its value?
etc. What counts and what has meaning is all of those meaningful qualities.
We comprehend particular things and make sense out of them by comparison
with other things. Thus, although a particular thing Is (esse) the meaning
(significare) of that thing depends on its relationship to other things.
"I am that I am" is true but has no meaning. I have meaning in
my relationship to and distinction from other things. I am a human means
that I have characteristic that are distinguished form other living entities.
I am an American means I am not some other nationality. Almost any positive
assertion takes on meaning in that it is a negation of other attributes.
description thinking versus prescription thinking (purpose)
|