Being as Phenomenon

January 24, 2012 at 23:44 | Posted in Everything | 8 Comments

An interesting note on the philosophical concept of being, Sartre’s philosophy basically states that the appearance of something is necessarily real. That is, no appearance can betray the essence it seeks to reveal.

So when we see red objects, we use these objects to grasp at the essence, Red.

And as an application, we can no longer say that an appearance is based on total falsity. All falsehood reveals some sort of essence. The least essence it could reveal is that of falsity (i.e., the general idea of falsity as untrue).

What does this mean in relation to the community? Each person reveals an aspect of the essence, but is not the essence itself. The essence is the being of the phenomenon; each person is merely the phenomenon of being. What does Sartre mean by these two terms? We have to know before we proceed.

Sartre means by “being of the phenomenon” the essence. This is not possessing being, nor is it having being, or any such relation:  it “is.” The “phenomenon of being” is what is existent, what is merely a manifestation of being. Thus essence is the revelation of being; existence is the being revealed.

So we have our persons, existent beings, who represent being itself. The existent human beings of a certain community are the aspects of the “essence” of humanity itself to the person within that community.

Thus, is it the individual who chooses to hate or love his community, or does the community itself determine such a choice in the individual? Unless the community consists of all living beings, the whole being cannot be realized within the mind of the individual. Thus all communities are necessarily incomplete and all communities will necessarily be defunct in some way.

And because of this defunct community the individual will be defunct as well.

Advertisements

8 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

  1. …Huh. Good post as usual, I suspect this has something to do with your reply to my comment on “Back from Leave” though… unless im completely missing the point, which is very very possible. XD

  2. Oh yes, it does. I actually made around 4-5 posts last night about that very subject, but I think I’m going to de-schedule them. I’m not as angry right now as I was at that point

  3. So basically, he looks at people hiding their true selves as revealing that they are hiding something (despite the fact that this can’t always be picked up on), therefore sees images as never being unreal (a true fact, but of what practical meaning? 100% accurate lie and bullshit detector machines do not exist) and people associate with communities they share interests/abilities/traits with, and do not have all possible interests and abilities in high amounts?

  4. Nah enox, dont de-schedule em, I am interested in seeing what you have to say, and not saying it is just accepting the fact and thats just kinda stupid *shrugs*

  5. to correct my own post before its taken the wrong way

    that was not intended to be offensive D:

  6. I’m not de-scheduling them anymore, you’re right. I shouldn’t just accept the fact because that would go against my principles.

    “So basically, he looks at people hiding their true selves as revealing that they are hiding something (despite the fact that this can’t always be picked up on), therefore sees images as never being unreal (a true fact, but of what practical meaning? 100% accurate lie and bullshit detector machines do not exist) and people associate with communities they share interests/abilities/traits with, and do not have all possible interests and abilities in high amounts?”

    Sort of, but by unreal is not meant “nonexistent” but rather not normal. So to combine certain qualities would be unreal: if we try to think of a pin-needle small star that is extremely heavy, we can’t really conceive of it, so it’s technically unreal (or try to imagine a square without edges-it’s not possible but the fact that I just listed “square” and “without edges” means that the essence of the phrase is always true, if something was truly nonexistent we couldn’t speak of it)

  7. Oh my, I see, that’s pretty cool.

  8. Yep, Sartre flipped my world-view upside down. AND I’VE ONLY READ THE INTRODUCTION.

    Where’s suicide when I need it? :B


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.

%d bloggers like this: