Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 09:26:05 EST
Subject: Briefly Brief



--part1_3b.35ebb672.2bb9a9fd_boundary

In a message dated 31/03/2003 06:57:18 GMT Daylight Time, 
michael-AT-sandwich-de-sign.co.uk writes:

Subj: briefly brief (for now) Date: 31/03/2003 06:57:18 GMT Daylight Time 
From: michael-AT-sandwich-de-sign.co.uk (michaelP) Sender: 
owner-heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu Reply-to: 
heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu To: heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu

Jud:
If an entity is there in front of you and you can see it, feel it, smell it, 
taste it, hear it you can be fairly certain that it exists. 

michaelP: 
sounds like existence sounds like presence...

Jud: In the snippet above I am addressing a real entity - an existing object 
which has a name [say a "chair"] and the word "chair" has a referent which is 
palpably and demonstrably present and I am sitting upon the object which is 
referred to by the word "chair." I am not addressing any ideational abstract 
reifications which relate to the general states of entities - i. e, words 
without any referents - like the "existence" of the chair, or the "presence" 
of the chair which I cannot sit upon.

Michael:
Briefly for now: the reality/actuality of something (possibly) real/actual is 
different from (is not identical to) the (possibly) real/actual thing itself.

Jud: 
The abstractions reality, actuality, existence, presence, are different from 
the chair in much the same way as any other word in our language which you 
care to choose - quite simply words are different from the temporal referents 
to which they are assigned or not assigned.

Michael: 
Similarly, the presence (thereness, face-ability, visibility, touch-ability, 
aromacity, taste-ability, audibility, etc... see above) of a present thing is 
(fairly certainly :-)) not identical to the present thing itself. Surely?

Jud: 
You are absolutely spot-on - the abstractions: presence, thereness, 
face-ability, visibility, touch-ability, aromacity, taste-ability, 
audibility, accessibility, value, origin, age, condition, etc., are not 
identical to the present thing itself - they are just WORDS - human words 
which are in no way identical or similar or a little like the chair in any 
way whatsoever. The chair is simply present in the cosmos in a certain 
spatio-temporal existential modality. The world can revolve around the chair, 
words can be attributed to it, humans can sit upon it, cats can scratch it, 
and dogs can pee on it. The chair - the insentient chair devoid of feeling 
and consciousness and animation just lies there subject to gravity and the 
variety of slings and arrows of outrageous fortune that chairs are subjected 
to before they end up in a skip.

Michael:
A difference persists.

Jud: 
The difference exists - but it is linguistic not ontological.

Michael:
Vive la difference.

Jud: 
Hear! Hear!



Cheers,

Jud.

<A HREF="http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/ ">http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/</A> 
Jud Evans - ANALYTICAL INDICANT THEORY.
<A HREF="http://uncouplingthecopula.freewebspace.com">http://uncouplingthecopula.freewebspace.com</A>

--part1_3b.35ebb672.2bb9a9fd_boundary

HTML VERSION: