In a comment involving an earlier post in this blog, I mentioned the word "being." Someone picked up on the term and suggested that I do a post on the subject. So here are a few angles on the word, culled from a variety of sources as best I remember them. As you can imagine it's a tough topic, and my mental pebbles are just a few from off a vast beach of them. I am setting these stones specifically inside a human context or frame. And I would be most interested in knowing whether any of the following stuff has resonance today.
To begin with, "being" is one of those words with a long history of controversy. Said differently, it's a word ancient in origin, linked to a variety of world religions and spiritualities, unable to be scientifically validated, mostly dropped from the late modern lexicon (especially in the West), and very difficult to use in a postmodern world--or so it is often thought.
So what's the word basically about--what's the reality and/or realities the word seeks to identify? Here are a few takes for reflection: the foundation brick of human existence; the nucleus of human personhood and identity; the residence of the human spirit; the rudimentary "soul" of personality; the launchpad for integrative activity; home to the mind/the will/and the affections; the anchor for what used to be called human nature; the seat of universal existential life--thereby offering common ground and a level playing field for uniting persons and and communities/cultures.
While the preceding offers interesting material to think about, "being" seems to have lost credence as a philosophical subject. However, I continue to think the word fingers something foundational, dynamic, and universal. An idea /reality still worth exploring. Now for a couple of footnotes.
If "being" is a living/breathing reality and not just a name on a page, then it seems to me that this reality oozes with implications. This includes implications for the world of art and as well as for a global world that shows itself deeply divided. Second, the whole subject prompts for me the question whether human beings are smart gorillas, or a species of life that has evolved into its own unique and/or special category/taxonomy.
Back to beginnings. "To be or not to be." What sorts of things might Shakespeare have had in mind? And Hamlet?
That's it for now folks.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
It certainly seems to me that anyone who's willing to deny that there is a distinction between existence and nonexistence will similarly deny standing to almost any of the other states and categories you've opened up.
In the end, heck! I will return the favor of denying their position validity, if only on the grounds that if we admit it there's literally nothing to argue about!
Post a Comment