Life as Being
For ancient philosophy, reality, being meant thing (object) or logo (order). Christian philosophy complements this pair with the third interpretation of being as a subject. From the New Age, a gradual transformation of the understanding of being begins, consisting in the transfer of the emphasis from the objective to its subjective side.
René Descartes comes close to understanding of being as subjectivity, but does not make a decisive step. For this step to be taken, it took another three centuries.
Immanuel Kant speaks of the world as a "construction", which is created according to the subjective forms of the organization of our sensuality and our reason.
Edmund Husserl , formulating the main points of his phenomenology, relies on the Kantian idea that categories are not generalizations of empirical experience, but constitute the original structural-logical forms of thinking. They, according to Husserl, constitute the original original being. Everything else acts as a kind of secondary reality, which the phenomenological philosophy "brackets and leaves without consideration.In essence, the categories that Kant treats as a priori forms of organization of thinking, in Husserl become forms of the "ideal being" itself, which has no direct relationship to the objective world. Thus, despite Kant's criticism, and even to a large extent thanks to it, by the twentieth century, European philosophy again has a turn toward ontology. But this new ontology differs significantly from the classical: in the center of its attention is not the substantial ("real") being, but the "being-process," which most philosophers interpret as life. The main characteristic feature of life-life is intentionality, ie. care for surrounding things, and, most importantly, for yourself.
Having defined life as life, we discover a new reality radically different from everything that was known to classical philosophy. But if this is so, traditional definitions are not suitable for describing the new reality, and the main task of philosophy is to find a new way to define this primary reality, which we call our life. The image of being that is life needs in new categories different both from the categories of the ancient "cosmic", and from the Kantian categories of "rational synthesis", and from the Hegelian categories of the logical self-development of the "Absolute Spirit". All these categorical structures are constructed as objective or, at worst, as intersubjective systems. But life is such a thing, which initially can not be either objective or even intersubjective! To survive my life can only myself .. No one can do this for me. Life is given to me "without the right of transfer," since this is not an abstract concept, but my and only my individual being! But is such a simple thing incomprehensible for thousands of years? Why?!
The fact is that life is always a process transitive (transitional). The transitivity of life is expressed in that paradoxical circumstance that to live is just what it means to do something other than life. Life transitivity is no less, but rather much more obvious than its self-worth. The self-evidence of the transitivity of life, coupled with a propensity for the substantial definition of being, has led to the conviction that if there is no life without interest in these or those things, then the value of life is rooted precisely in these things, and not in itself in the manifestation of interest (ie not in life itself). But if the meaning and value of life go beyond the limits of life itself, they can end up anywhere: life can be sacrificed for the sake of true Faith, the greatness of the Empire, the preservation of the regimental banner or even the salvation of a valuable tractor. And it is good still, if only by the life.
So, at the heart of the depreciation life, lies in the fact that, in discovering life as a constant interest in a particular object, a person attaches greater importance to this subject than to the interest itself. Perhaps only the Buddhist tradition concentrates attention it is on interest, not on its subjects. But it does it more likely to solve the problem of false values in one fell swoop: there is no need to debunk each of them separately, when you can immediately destroy the source of their occurrence.
So, let's highlight the main stages of the formation of the idea of being-life:
† The 17th century is the decisive opening of consciousness, subjectivity, "I" committed by Descartes. This discovery consisted in discovering that among all things existing or claiming to exist, there is at least one way of being which fundamentally differs from the mode of being of all other things. This is thinking, which Descartes himself does turn into a thing.
† XIX century - an appeal to subjectivity in the form of no longer thinking, but labor, which Karl Marx did. In the interpretation of Marx, labor is first and foremost "abstract labor", an unskilled effort devoid of qualitative originality and of its own significance. All his dignity receives labor from the necessity to which he serves, as a result of which labor has a homogeneous, purely quantitative character, allowing it to be measured and rewarded on an hourly basis.
† XX century - the only undoubted reality is precisely life , not the idea of Plato or the form of Aristotle, not God of Christian philosophy. At the same time, this is not the pure thinking of Hegel's idealism, but it is not the abstract labor of Marxian materialism. Life can contain these moments or be directed to them, but it does not completely reduce to any of them.
Not transcendental values give meaning and value to life. On the contrary, its infinite variety (creative potency) allows it to include in its content, including transcendent values. What is the originality of this true and primary being, which is life? The philosophical (ontological) understanding of life is different from its biological understanding. The essence of this difference is as follows:
life in its optological sense has nothing to do with genus and species; philosophical life is always individual;
► life (again in the ontological sense) is inextricably linked with reflection. Nothing we do is our life, if we do not realize it. This is the first decisive property with which we come across: life is a unique being that has the privilege to be for the sarma of oneself. To live is to feel life;
► The world in which we live consists of objects that are pleasant or unpleasant for us, threatening, attracting, etc. For our life it does not matter whether these objects are bodily or spiritual; What matters to us is that they impress us: they interest, please, frighten or make us suffer. The world of our lives is, first of all, what the pass is interested in. The life world is not an "intelligible world"; Plato, not divine being Augustine and even not "objective reality" New European science. In this world, everyone is among the questions and problems that concern him.
The original pioneer of this life world was Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900). To him we are obliged to discover a new perspective, which allowed us to see completely different things in a completely different way.
First of all, Nietzsche shows that the criterion for assessing life is inside life itself!
Concepts that emanate from the transitive understanding of life, placed the criterion outside of itself. Life was considered successful if its external task was fulfilled: the greatness of the Empire was ensured, true faith was attained ...
Nietzsche shows that to distinguish between failed (authentic ) and failed ( unauthentic ) life, there is no need to resort to extraterrestrial criteria: theological, social, cultural, etc. Life contains within itself its own criteria, and therefore itself selects and hierarchizes values. We can see the movement of life in its ascending and descending (until degeneration) directions. Somewhere between these two poles, Nietzsche believes, one can find a critical point from which life tends either to perfection or degeneracy. Down from this point are individuals with decreasing biological potency of this kind - low, "mean" individuals; go up purebred, "noble".
Here are two value guidelines: nobility and baseness, between which all individuals are located. In turn, nobility and meanness are expressed through the presence or absence in a person of such qualities as health, strength, courage, audacity, the ability to take risks, etc. As you can see, all these are not external objects, but internal, actually human life qualities. The mind also enters this complex, but now it is no longer the purely abstract mind of the transcendental subject who looks at the world from the point of view of eternity, but the mind as an attribute of life as skill, the ability to find the way out of difficult life situations. The mind occupies an important place in this complex, because to see and evaluate oneself is the basic and initial attribute of life. This vision is a direct feeling of openness for me of my own life, its presence right in front of me. It is this feeling of openness, the presence of life that provides me with possession , making her my life. I make it what I want. Just this ability is deprived of a madman: he does not dispose of his life, and in general, strictly speaking, she is not his life. That's why he is insane, because responsibility can only be for what belongs to me, is under my control.
To live (to be) means to be in the world, but this turns out to be to be something to be occupied with. I consist of my studies by what is in the world, and the world, because it is my world, consists of what takes me, and only. However, the understanding of life as life, and precisely of my life, gives it at least three dramatic moments .
† The first dramatic moment : to live is not to choose the time and place you like, but suddenly, not knowing how, cast into the world, which is impossible to change. Our life begins without our prior consent, and in this respect we are like sailors thrown out by a storm on an unfamiliar island.
Life is given to us, abandoned to us, or we are thrown into it at what is given to us: life is a problem that we are compelled to solve. This sudden, unpredictable character is the essence of being-life in contrast to the pre-planned " the substantial being of the old philosophy. At the same time, the life that I carry out, or what I do in life, I decided (not in the sense of planned, but in the sense of decided). My life, before becoming an action, is the decision to act - the decision of my life. It is not given to us in the finished predetermination of fate, but consists in our own decisions about ourselves.
To live is to be ( find yourself) in a world that is rich in possibilities. The world of my life at each moment is for me from the opportunity to do this or that, and not from the necessity against the desire to do one thing. But for such a decision to be possible, one must simultaneously have freedom and its boundaries - "life circumstances". Thus, life turns out to be a combination of fatality , and freedom . Fatality offers us a certain range of possibilities, i.e. offers us various options for destiny. We accept fatalism and within it we decide on destiny. Our life is the fate that we decided !
† Second dramatic moment : we choose life and fate ourselves, but at the same time we can not fully calculate everything in advance, because even if we are sure what will happen to us tomorrow, we always consider it as an opportunity.
We are not given the choice of the world - this is the share of fatality, but we find a field with the life horizon of opportunities - this is the part of its freedom. Therefore, life is freedom within the fatalities and fatalities within freedom .
We are plunged into our lives, and at the same time, what we are plunged into must be done by ourselves, making ourselves aware of this by talking about it, creating the ego. Our life is our being. We are only it and nothing more. There is no rest or respite (even a dream, which is a form of biological life, falls out of life in its philosophical sense).
† The third dramatic moment: our life is a clash with the future. The time in which we live is not the past or the present. Life is an activity that looks forward to the future, and the meaning of the past and the present is revealed only later, and only in connection with this future. Life is the future, something that does not yet exist.
My body with all the physiological processes taking place in it, is located in the present physical moment. But can my life be reduced to a combination of these physiological processes? My I is located where my attention is focused, but it is not tied to the current physical moment. At this point, I can think about what I'm just going to say or do, I'm worried about what the results of these words and actions will be. In the present, I live by defining the goal, forming the project of the desired future.
But to create this future, means are needed, and to find these tools, I refer to memory , representing my past. As a result, the past becomes real to me, this, as I revive it to find means for the embodiment of my future. All this happens simultaneously, therefore any moment of life is "stretched" in three dimensions: the future I want, refers me to the past that I remember for finding the means that I must apply in the present to create the desired future. So we see that life is about making decisions about what we are going to be. In this case, live - means taking care of the future .
Being and time
The philosopher of the Italian Renaissance Giovanni della Casa (1503-1556) wrote that life for the most part consists of insignificance: "Only from time to time our life seems to thicken, thicken, get strained. A great sorrow or a great aspiration invokes us, then we say that important events happen to us. " Time of events - what is it? Martin Heidegger calls this time ecstatic (from Greek ekstasis - letters to be beside themselves).
Imagine a deer grazing in a forest clearing. Physically, it is at the point where its jaws are torn and chewed up by the grass. But his hearing, sight, smell are far from here. Because of the constant external danger, he listens, peers at what is far beyond the clearing. To appeal to oneself would be to distract from what is happening around, and such a distraction could cost the animal life. Nature is cruel, she does not tolerate distraction. Attention to nature is life in action, in ecstatic time.
An archaic man, like our deer, lives, as it were, constantly on guard posts, his attention is completely absorbed in being, immersed in it. The Man of Antiquity still lives next to his brother-animal and like him lives "in ecstasy", i.e. beside himself. Modern man is much more immersed in himself, facing himself (or to the environment he created himself). How does attention, initially centrifugal, directed at what surrounds us, make an incredible turn to oneself and one's own "I", turns away from the surrounding and takes to look inside himself? After all, theorizing, philosophizing, it means, in fact, not living. Theory and its extreme form - philosophy - are interested in things differently than they are interested in life practice. Theorizing is a specific form of manifestation of interest; the actively occupied position of the "disinterested observer", when we, as it were, "remove" thing, keep it from sinking into our lives. Theorizing is the desire to arrange a thing in such a way as to see it outside the perspective of my vital interest in it, to discover its own "self," to find that absolutely own, which belongs to it beyond all my partial interest. This retention sometimes requires considerable effort, but for more than a two-thousand-year history of theorizing, it has become the familiar position that the same Heidegger characterizes as "forgetfulness of life!" He suggests turning over traditional beliefs, abandoning the usual view, according to which the desire to have a thing, can arise only if we know this thing, have seen it before. In fact, we do not want it because we know, on the contrary, we will be able to see it only because in the depths of our hearts we have wished and begun to seek in the world with the help of our senses. Before we see what surrounds us, we represent the initial accumulation of desires, aspirations and illusions. We come to the world with a system of preferences and neglects, so it's not true to say that the first thing we are dealing with is impressions coming to us from things.
If there is a "I'm thinking", then there is a world in which and about which I think. Therefore, the main truth is my coexistence with the world. Therefore, my being is coexistence, co-being with the world.
Also We Can Offer!
- Argumentative essay
- Best college essays
- Buy custom essays online
- Buy essay online
- Cheap essay
- Cheap essay writing service
- Cheap writing service
- College essay
- College essay introduction
- College essay writing service
- Compare and contrast essay
- Custom essay
- Custom essay writing service
- Custom essays writing services
- Death penalty essay
- Do my essay
- Essay about love
- Essay about yourself
- Essay help
- Essay writing help
- Essay writing service reviews
- Essays online
- Fast food essay
- George orwell essays
- Human rights essay
- Narrative essay
- Pay to write essay
- Personal essay for college
- Personal narrative essay
- Persuasive writing
- Write my essay
- Write my essay for me cheap
- Writing a scholarship essay