Difference between revisions of "Being and Existence" - New World Encyclopedia

From New World Encyclopedia
 
(271 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Ready}}
+
{{Ebcompleted}}{{Ready}}{{Approved}}{{Images OK}}{{Submitted}}{{Paid}}{{Copyedited}}{{2Copyedited}}
{{For|the philosophical movement|Existentialism}}
+
[[File:Being Parmenides.png|thumb|350px|The Being according to [[Parmenides]]is like the mass of a [[sphere]].]]
{{For|the existence of god|Existence of God}}
+
'''Being and existence''' in [[philosophy]] are related and somewhat overlapping with respect to their meanings. Classical Greek had no independent word of "existence." The word "existence," as distinguished from the word "[[being]]," arose in the [[Middle Ages]]. Influenced by [[Islamic philosophy]] that recognized the contingency of the created world as compared with [[God]] the Creator, [[Christianity|Christian]] philosophers such as [[Thomas Aquinas]] used the Latin word ''"existere"'' ("to exist" or "to appear") as distinct from ''"esse"'' ("to be") or ''"essentia"'' ("essence"). The Medieval distinction between essence and existence in the world, however, was critiqued by later [[theology|theologians]] and philosophers for various reasons.
  
The questions of existence or being (Greek, "eon" or "ousia"; Latin, "esse"; German "Sein"; French, "étre"), in [[philosophy]], has been one of central topics in [[metaphysics]], and the study of "being" or "existence" is called [[ontology]].
+
Modern [[existentialism]] maintained the distinction between essence and existence, but reversed the Medieval priority of essence over existence. The [[Germany|German]] philosopher [[Martin Heidegger]], who critiqued the Thomistic theory of the causal relationship of difference between God and the world as well as its related theory of the distinction between essence and existence, dealt with the question of being in a very new way that involved the [[human being]] as ''Dasein'' ("being-there"), which to him is synonymous with existence.
 +
{{toc}}
 +
The majority of [[analytic philosophy|analytic philosophers]] have rejected the distinction of being and existence. But, for philosophers and theologians who consider the distinction between being and existence an important one, there are two significant issues: [[teleology]] and individuation or embodiment. For what purpose do individual things exist? How do things become individual embodiments of their corresponding universals? A notable approach to the first issue was proposed by the [[America]]n theologian Schubert Ogden, who combined existentialism with [[process thought|process theism]] to explain the unity of reality centering on God's aim. The [[Spain|Spanish]] [[Jesuit]] [[Francisco Suárez]] approached the second issue by proposing that the [[form and matter]] of a [[substance]] in union determine the individuality of that embodied substance.
  
The being or existence has been often inquired into in contrast to its reciprocal concept and the meaning of being differs according to its paired concept, for example, being and becoming, being and appearance or phenomena, being and thought, being or "is" and ought, being and essence. Each philosopher, implicitly or explicitly, often holds certain sense of being as primary and his or her understanding of being constitutes the framework or the background of his or her thought, although it is not necessarily thematically discussed by the philosopher.
+
==Relationship of being and existence==
 +
===Greek philosophy===
 +
History shows a rather complex relationship between [[being]] and existence. The classical Greek equivalent of the English verb "be" was ''"einai,"'' but there seems to have been no classical Greek equivalent of the English verb "exist." It was only in the [[Middle Ages]] that the Latin word ''"exsistere"'' was made from a combination of ''"ex"'' ("out of") and ''"sistere"'' ("to cause to stand") to mean "to exist," "to appear," or "to emerge." The reason why classical Greek did not have any distinct concept of "exist" was that in [[Greek philosophy]] from [[Parmenides]] to [[Aristotle]] the primary project was a veridical one of articulating truthfulness in reality through copula sentences of the form "X is Y."<ref name=Kahn>Charles H. Kahn, "Why Existence Does Not Emerge as a Distinct Concept in Greek Philosophy?" in ''Philosophies of Existence: Ancient and Medieval'', ed. Parviz Morewedge (New York: Fordham University Press, 1982).</ref> The theory of predication was central, and the theory of existence peripheral. So, even when Greek philosophers wanted to express the concept of existence, they did so only in the predicative form; "X exists" was expressed as "X is something." Thus, the word ''"einai"'' ("be") had to be used more widely than its predicative meaning. It was in the context of this wider use of ''"einai"'' ("be") that Aristotle referred to the concept of existence as ''"hoti esti"'' ("that it is") as distinguished from ''"ti esti"'' ("what it is"), which would mean [[essence]].
  
[[Thomas Aquinas]], for example, conceived [[God]] as the primary being, from which all other beings in the world receive its existence. [[Materialism|Materialists]], on the contrary, conceive a material or sensible entity as the primary model of being and identify physical sensibility with the primary sense of being. [[Aristotle]], [[Husserl]], and [[Heidegger]], are some of philosophers who developed their philosophy with full awareness that there are diverse senses of being.
+
Of course, in late Greek philosophy the old Greek verb ''"hyparkein"'' (originally, "to make a beginning") started to be used non-technically to mean "to exist"; but, it and its early Latin rendering ''"exsistere"'' still continued somewhat ambiguously to retain the predicative meaning as well, and furthermore the use of the noun ''exsistentia'' ("existence") was not popular yet.
  
[[Logic|logicians]] use the symbol ∃ to denote the [[existential quantifier]], which asserts the existence of some object with certain properties.
+
===Medieval Christian philosophy===
 +
Eventually, however, the concept of "''existentia''" ("existence") was established amongst Medieval [[Christianity|Christian]] philosophers such as [[Thomas Aquinas|St. Thomas Aquinas]] as a technical term contrasted with "''essentia''" ("essence"), an abstract form of the presumed present participle of ''"esse"'' ("to be"). While essence apparently meant "what a thing is," existence meant "that a thing exists." According to Charles H. Khan, this development of the modern sense of existence occurred under the influence of [[Islamic philosophy]], which distinguished existence ''(wujud)'' from essence ''(mahiat)'' in its radical revision of Greek ontology in light of a [[Bible|biblical]] [[metaphysics]] of [[creation (theology)|creation]] within [[Islam]] which distinguished the created world (contingency) from [[God]] (necessity).<ref name=Kahn/> Aquinas adopted this, maintaining that the essence and existence of each and every contingent, finite creature are distinct, while essence and existence are identical within God, who is therefore preeminent over the world. According to him, God causes each and every finite creature to "exist" with its "essence."
  
== Diverse senses of being ==
+
Aquinas, however, indicated this causal relationship of difference between God and the world in terms of the ''"analogia entis"'' ("analogy of being"), referring to God and each finite creature as ''"ipsum esse subsistens"'' (Self-subsistent Being) and ''"ens"'' (being), respectively. This means that in spite of the development of ''"existentia"'' ("existence") as a new word with a distinctive meaning in the Middle Ages, still the term ''"esse"'' ("to be") was used more generally to cover the meaning of existence as well. Modern [[existentialism]]'s emphasis upon the priority of existence over essence was still alien.
===Being and becoming===
 
Being in contrast with becoming means
 
  
 +
===Later criticisms of the Thomistic position===
 +
The Thomistic distinction between essence and existence in the created world was criticized by later theologians and philosophers for various reasons. Critics include [[Duns Scotus]], [[Francisco Suárez]], [[René Descartes]], [[Gottfried Leibniz]], [[David Hume]], and [[Immanuel Kant]]. But, especially existentialim's criticism was notable because of its attempt to reverse the order of priority between essence and existence. [[Søren Kierkegaard]] denied the importance of the objective essence of a thing in favor of the subjective appropriation of it. He, thus, held that there is no truth in objective knowledge of essence itself, and that the truth about reality is revealed only in the human subject's "passion of the infinite" as a believer. In talking about the essence and existence of a human being, [[Jean-Paul Sartre]], for whom existentialism meant an [[atheism|atheistic]] [[humanism]], went so far as to say that because there is no Creator, existence precedes essence.
  
 +
The most notable critic, however, was the German philosopher [[Martin Heidegger]]. According to Heidegger, Aquinas' theory of the causal relationship of difference between God and the world through the analogy of being, and his related theory of the distinction between essence and existence in the world, are far from answering the fundamental question of the meaning of being, which was not answered in the long philosophical tradition in the West anyway because being itself was taken for granted as self-evident or undefinable. Therefore, in order to let the human being constantly pursue the question of "being" ''(Sein)'', Heidegger referred to that human being as ''"[[Dasein]]"'' (literally "being-there"), who, as a "being-in-the-world" ''(In-der-Welt-sein)'' thrown out to the temporal and phenomenological world of "beings" ''(Seiendes)'', is faced with [[angst]] and mortality there, but who nevertheless is expected to experience [[authenticity (philosophy)|authenticity]] by standing in the openness of "being" in the midst of "beings." Here, the sense of "being" to be experienced is pre-conceptual and non-propositional in the everyday situation of human life; and the causal relationship of difference between God as "Self-subsistent Being" ''(ipsum esse subsistens)'' and the created world of "beings" ''(ens)'' in Aquinas' metaphysics is superseded by the distinction between "being" ''(Sein)'' and "beings" ''(Seiendes)'' in Heidegger's phenomenological ontology in pursuit of the meaning of "being." For Heidegger, the word "existence" ''(Existenz)'' is simply synonymous with ''Dasein'': "The 'essence' of ''Dasein'' lies in its existence."<ref>Martin Heidegger, ''Being and Time,'' tr. John Macquarrie & Edward Robinson (New York: Harper & Row, 1962), 67.</ref>
  
== Historical conceptions ==  
+
==Being and existence in analytic philosophy==
Existence can be seen as central to many systems of belief, religions, and myths. [[Belief]]s concerning existence may posit additional properties, such as ''value'' or ''goodness''. Divergent conceptions of existence have often resulted in tension amongst communities with differing beliefs about existence, especially when coupled with the related question of [[World_view|worldview]].
+
===Actualism===
 +
Many [[analytic philosophy|analytic philosophers]] in the twentieth century such as [[Gottlob Frege]], [[Bertrand Russell]], and [[W.V. Quine]], believed that [[being]] and existence are identical, that is, that what there is, is precisely what exists. It is basically so-called "actualism," and it maintains that there is no kind of being beyond actual existence. The identity of being and existence also means that every predicative proposition can be translated into an existential one without changing meaning. For example, adding "exists" to "a wise man" to give the complete sentence "A wise man exists" has the same effect as joining "some man" to "wise" using the copula to say "Some man is wise." So, the "exists" of the existential proposition takes the place of the copula. This view is the basis of the dominant position in modern Anglo-American analytic philosophy: that existence is asserted by the existential quantifier.  
  
In the western tradition of philosophy, the first comprehensive treatments of the subject are from [[Plato]]'s ''[[Phaedo]]'', ''[[The Republic (Plato)|Republic]]'', and ''[[Statesman (dialogue)|Statesman]]'' and [[Aristotle]]'s ''[[Metaphysics (Aristotle)|Metaphysics]]'', though earlier fragmentary writing exists.  Aristotle developed a complicated theory of being, according to which only individual things, called [[substances]] fully have being, but other things such as relations, quantity, time and place (called the [[Categories (Aristotle)|categories]]) have a derivative kind of being, dependent on individual things.  
+
===Possibilism===
 +
Of course, there is a school called "possibilism," which distinguishes between being and existence, that is, between what there is and what exists, saying that the latter comprises a relatively small portion of the former. According to this, although there are things that actually exist, there are also things that do not exist: they are what there merely are, not having ''existence'' or ''actuality,'' which only things that actually exist have. Such things are non-existent possible things like Santa Claus, unicorns, aliens, and people that were never born. They could have actually existed, but as it happens, they simply do not. To this possibilist realm of the non-existent, some of the followers of [[Alexius Meinong]] such as Terence Parsons would add impossible objects like square circles and wooden iron, which have contradictory properties.  
  
The [[Neo-Platonist]]s and some early [[Christianity|Christian]] philosophers argued about whether existence had any reality except in the mind of God. Some taught that existence was a snare and a delusion, that the world, the flesh, and the devil existed only to tempt weak humankind away from God.  
+
===Adjusted possibilism===
 +
But, scholars such as [[Quine]], for whom there is no distinction between being and existence, have critiqued possibilism, by saying that we cannot embrace non-actual possible objects since there is no real criterion of identity for them: "No entity without identity."<ref>W.V. Quine, ''Ontological Relativity and Other Essays'' (New York: Columbia University Press, 1969), 23.</ref> This critique from Quine has given rise to an adjusted version of possibilism, which now agrees that being and existence are identical, saying that everything there is exists, but which nevertheless insists that not everything that exists is ''actual'', that is, that there ''exist'' things that fail to be actual. This, however, looks like a word game, simply renaming being as "existence" and existence as "actuality." Thus, a more advanced version of possibilism, which takes Quine's objection more seriously, has been developed by [[David Kellogg Lewis]].  
  
The medieval philosopher [[Thomas Aquinas]], perhaps following the Persian philosopher [[Avicenna]], argued that God is pure being, and that in God [[essence]] and existence are the same.  At about the same time, the [[nominalist]] philosopher [[William of Ockham]], argued, in Book I of his [[Sum of Logic|Summa Totius Logicae]] (''Treatise on all Logic'', written some time before 1327) that Categories are not a form of Being in their own right, but derivative on the existence of individuals.
+
===Modal realism===
 +
While agreeing with the adjusted version just mentioned above that being and existence are identical, but that actuality is to be distinguished from existence, [[David Kellogg Lewis|Lewis]] has a new understanding of actuality, treating it in terms of ''relation''. Thus, according to Lewis, when people say that there are things that exist but are not actual, it means that there are things that are spatiotemporally unrelated to the world, although they exist in a full-fledged sense in other worlds. The word "actual," then, is an ''indexical,'' whose reference on any given occasion of utterance is determined by the context or world in which the utterance occurs. So, when one utter, "New York City is actual" (or more naturally, "New York City actually exists"), its truthfulness is made not because actuality is some intrinsic property of New York City but rather because New York City occupies the same world as the speaker. Lewis' version of possibilism is sometimes called "modal realism," and it is quite Quinean.
  
In the [[Hinduism|Hindu]] philosophy, existence is only of one object called [[Brahma]]. All other forms of existence are manifestation of this unique reality Brahma, due to influence of an agency called [[Maya]]. To perceive the existence of the unique reality of Brahma, one has to learn to come out of the influence of Maya.  
+
==Different realms of reality==
 +
The issue on whether or not there are different worlds or realms of reality is not new. Ancient [[Greek philosophy]] observed that there are concrete, material [[being]]s in the spatiotemporal world in the sense of physical reality which is detectable by physical senses or physical instruments, while there are also [[idea]]s and [[values]] such as [[love]], [[justice]], and [[good and evil|good]] which however are not of the same physically sensible material. For [[Plato]], those ideas and values in an incorporeal realm of the world are real beings because they are self-existent and immutable, while material beings in the corporeal world are merely their ephemeral "shadows" far from real beings. For [[Aristotle]], by contrast, only individual things called [[substance]]s in the spatiotemporal world are fully existent beings, and other beings, called [[category|categories]], such as relation, quantity, time and place, and Plato's ideas and values, have a derivative kind of being, dependent on those individual things. In the Middle Ages, based upon a biblical metaphysics of creation, the notion of existence was established to show the emergence of the created world, distinguishable from being in general and also from essence.
 +
 +
The Plato-Aristotle tension above was echoed in the Medieval controversy between realism and [[nominalism]]. The approach of realists was to argue that the sentence "[[Socrates]] is wise," which contains a noun reference only for "Socrates," can be rewritten as "Socrates has wisdom," which apparently proves the existence of a reference for "wisdom" as well. This argument, however, was inverted by nominalists such as [[William of Ockham]] in arguing that "Socrates has wisdom" can be rewritten as "Socrates is wise," which contains a reference only for "Socrates." The nominalist method has basically been inherited in analytic philosophy, which holds that there is hardly any kind of being beyond actual existence.
  
===In early modern philosophy===  
+
==Teleology, being, and existence==
The [[Early modern Europe|early modern]] treatment of the subject derives from [[Antoine Arnauld]] and [[Pierre Nicole]]'s Logic, or 'The Art of Thinking', better known as the ''[[Port-Royal Logic]]'', first published in 1662. Arnauld thought that a [[proposition]] or [[Decision making|judgment]], consists of taking two different ideas and either putting them together or rejecting them:
+
The [[teleology|teleological]] nature of reality was discussed by [[Plato]] and [[Aristotle]]. Plato identified the Idea of the Good as the ultimate cause or measure in the whole of reality, saying that things that are gain their usefulness or value from it. Aristotle maintained that each [[substance]] has its final cause, which guides it throughout various changes it goes through to reach what it is. According to him, the final cause is virtually identical with the formal and efficient causes because all these can be attributed to the form of each substance, which is immanent in it, although [[God]] as "pure form" is the ultimate final, formal, and efficient cause, towards which all things tend. This teleological approach does not believe that the final causes of different substances are incompatible with one other, but rather that they are for one another. Hence, "extrinsic finality," through which the harmonious relationship of different individuals is made possible, is distinguished from the "intrinsic finality" of each individual, through which it is directed towards what it is.<ref>[https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14474a.htm Teleology] ''The Catholic Encyclopedia''. Retrieved May 26, 2021.</ref> Aristotle's teleology was inherited to the creationist [[theology]] of [[Thomas Aquinas]] and others in the [[Catholic Church]].
  
{{bquote|After conceiving things by our ideas, we compare these ideas and, finding that some belong together and others do not, we unite or separate them. This is called affirming or denying, and in general judging.  
+
With the coming of the modern period, [[philosophy|philosophers]] began to question teleology. [[Francis Bacon]] and [[René Descartes]] cautioned against the abusive attribution of Aristotelian final causes to various things and events. One of the few exceptions was [[Gottfried Leibniz]]' notion of "pre-established harmony" of monads programmed by God. [[Immanuel Kant]] rejected not only the [[Aristotelianism|Aristotelian]] teleology of nature, but also the possibility of traditional [[metaphysics]] itself. Kant limited teleology to the subjective realm of [[mind]] and explored its possibility within the realms of [[ethics]] and [[aesthetics]]. Although [[Hegel]] temporally revived teleology in his speculative metaphysics, most post-Hegelian philosophers were not interested in [[ontology]] with its teleology of nature.  
  
This judgment is also called a proposition, and it is easy to see that it must have two [[term]]s. One term, of which one affirms or denies something, is called the [[subject (philosophy)|subject]]; the other term, which is affirmed or denied, is called the [[attribute]] or [[predicate (logic)|Praedicatum]].|x|x|Antoine Arnauld|''The Art of Thinking'' ''([[Port-Royal Logic]])'',(1662)  (translated J. Buroker 1996), Logic, II.3, page 82}}
+
[[Analytic philosophy|Analytic philosophers]] refused metaphysics itself and limited the question of teleology to the realm of conceptual analysis of [[language]]s. However, in the twentieth century, [[Martin Heidegger]] brought back ontology as a central question of philosophy. Combining the two trends of thought of his time, [[phenomenology]] and [[hermeneutics]], Heidegger developed ontology as a hermeneutic phenomenology. Within the framework of hermeneutic phenomenology, which still incorporated the Kantian [[skepticism]] of speculative metaphysics, he discussed the teleology of [[being]], conceptualizing the interconnected mode of human existence as "being-in-the-world" (''In-der-Welt-sein'').  
  
The two terms are joined by the verb "is" (or "is not," if the predicate is denied of the subject). Thus every proposition has three components: the two terms, and the "[[copula]]" that connects or separates them. Even when the proposition has only two words, the three terms are still there. For example "God loves humanity," really means "God is a lover of humanity," "God exists" means "God is a thing."
+
Also with the emergence and development of existentialism, the question of the purposiveness, value, and relatedness of being has been addressed in a new way. [[Martin Buber]], for example, dealt with it in the context of the "I-Thou" relationship. [[Gabriel Marcel]] came up with the mutual, communal activity of being. However, although Buber and Marcel were theists, existentialism in general has often been critiqued of being fundamentally humanistic. Therefore, any teleology or theory of value developed by existentialism, no matter how insightful it may sound, has tended to be blamed for being self-made. At the same time, traditional Aristotelian teleology has been criticized of not being able to successfully establish the true relations not only amongst different individual substances but also between them and God because of the Aristotelian notion of God as self-contained "pure form" or "unmoved mover." To address these possible weaknesses of both existentialism and Aristotelianism, Schubert Ogden proposed to link the experiencing human subject in existentialism and the experiencing God of dipolarity in [[process thought]], hoping that the linkage of existentialist humanism and process theism in this regard would bring in a situation in which the unity of the whole of reality is realized centering on God's aim.<ref>Schubert Ogden, ''The Reality of God and Other Essays'' (Dallas, TX: Southern Methodist University Press, 1992).</ref>
  
This theory of judgment dominated logic for centuries, but it has some obvious difficulties: it only considers proposition of the form "All A are B.," a form which logicians call [[universal quantifier|universal]].  It does not allow propositions of the form "Some A are B.," a form logicians call [[existential quantifier|existential]].  If neither A nor B includes the idea of existence, then "some A are B" simply adjoins A to B.  Conversely, if A or B do include the idea of existence in the way that "triangle" contains the idea "three angles equal to two right angles," then "A exists" is automatically true, and we have an [[ontological proof]] of A's existence.  (Indeed Arnauld's contemporary [[Descartes]] famously argued so, regarding the concept "God" (discourse 4,  Meditation 5). Arnauld's theory was current until the middle of the nineteenth century.  
+
==Existence as individuation or embodiment==
 +
The world of phenomena is the world where many particular things exist. Each particular thing is considered to have been developed or determined from its corresponding category or universal idea. The universal idea, then, is considered to have been individuated or embodied in that particular thing.
  
[[David Hume]] argued that the claim that a thing exists, when added to our notion of a thing, does not add anything to the concept. For example, if we form a complete notion of Moses, and superadd to that notion the claim that Moses existed, we are not adding anything to the notion of Moses.
+
===Catholic philosophy===
[[Immanuel Kant|Kant]] also argued that existence is not a "real" predicate, but gave no explanation of how this is possible, indeed his famous discussion of the subject is merely a restatement of Arnauld's doctrine that in the proposition "God is omnipotent," the verb "is" signifies the joining or separating of two concepts such as "God" and "omnipotence."
+
Medieval Catholic philosophy dealt with the issue of individuation. According to [[Thomas Aquinas]], the cause of individuation is matter, because different [[horse]]s, for example, result when their common universal idea of "horseness" is individuated by matter in each of them. It is just like today many different cars of the same model come into existence when its common mold is stamped to materials, which therefore turn out to be the cause of individuation. Aquinas called matter with this function ''"materia quantitate signata"'' ("matter signed in quantity"). According to [[Duns Scotus]], however, formless matter, which is itself indeterminate, cannot serve to make "horseness" into this horse or that horse. Although horseness itself may be common and repeatable, the horseness of this horse is to be distinguished from that of that horse. Scotus held, therefore, that individuation is caused by a determination called a ''haecceitas'' ("thisness"). It is not a bare particular in the sense of a [[substance]] but rather a non-qualitative property of a substance. It is something like a form. [[Francisco Suárez]], a [[Spain|Spanish]] [[Jesuit]] philosopher in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth century, went one step further, by maintaining that the principle of individuation is ''both'' this matter and this [[form]] of a substance in union, although the form is the chief principle: ''adaequatum individuationis principium esse hanc materiam et hanc formam inter se unitas, inter quae praecipuum principium est forma''.<ref>Francisco Suárez, ''Disputationes Metaphysicae: Disputationes IV, V, VI, VII (Latin Edition)'' (Independently published, 2020, ISBN 979-8637680733).</ref>
  
==Predicative nature of existence==  
+
===Religion===
[[John Stuart Mill]] (and also Kant's pupil [[Johann Friedrich Herbart|Herbart]]) argued that the predicative nature of existence was proved by sentences like "A centaur is a poetic fiction" <ref> John Stuart Mill, ''A System of Logic'' (London, Longmans, green, and co., 1884. OCLC 1261114)</ref> or "A greatest number is impossible" (Herbart). [[Franz Brentano]] challenged this, so also (as is better known) did [[Gottlob Frege|Frege]].  Brentano argued that we can join the concept represented by a noun phrase "an A" to the concept represented by an adjective "B" to give the concept represented by the noun phrase "a B-A."  For example, we can join "a man" to "wise" to give "a wise man."  But the noun phrase "a wise man" is not a sentence, whereas "some man is wise" is a sentence.  Hence the copula must do more than merely join or separate concepts.  Furthermore, adding "exists" to "a wise man," to give the complete sentence "a wise man exists" has the same effect as joining "some man" to "wise" using the copula.  So the copula has the same effect as "exists."  Brentano argued that every categorical proposition can be translated into an existential one without change in meaning and that the "exists" and "does not exist" of the existential proposition take the place of the copula.  He showed this by the following examples:
+
In many [[religion]]s such as [[Hinduism]], [[Taoism]], [[Confucianism]], and [[Christianity]], [[enlightenment (concept)|enlightened]] people are considered to be individual embodiments of universal [[truth]]. Concrete existence is understood to have an intricate relationship with truth. [[Daoism]], for example, sees [[Lao Tzu]] as the embodiment of ''[[Tao]]''. In Christianity, [[Jesus]] said, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." ([[Gospel of John|John]] 14:6). Here, truth is even understood not as some kind of property or object one can possess or lose, but as existence itself. So, Jesus did not say, "I have the truth," but "I am the truth." [[Christian Theology|Christian theology]] identifies him as the [[Logos]] Incarnate. ''Avatamsaka Sutra'' in [[Buddhism]] describes the world as the manifestation of truth.
 
 
: The categorical proposition "Some man is sick," has the same meaning as the existential proposition "A sick man exists" or "There is a sick man."
 
 
 
: The categorical proposition "No stone is living" has the same meaning as the existential proposition "A living stone does not exist" or "there is no living stone."
 
 
 
: The categorical proposition "All men are mortal" has the same meaning as the existential proposition "An immortal man does not exist" or "there is no immortal man."
 
 
 
: The categorical proposition "Some man is not learned" has the same meaning as the existential proposition "A non-learned man exists" or "there is a non-learned man."
 
 
 
Frege developed a similar view (though later) in his great work [[The Foundations of Arithmetic]], as did [[Charles Peirce]].  The Frege-Brentano view is the basis of the dominant position in [[Analytic philosophy|modern Anglo-American philosophy]]: that existence is asserted by the existential quantifier (as expressed by [[Willard Van Orman Quine|Quine]]'s slogan "To be is to be the value of a variable." &mdash; ''On What There Is'', 1948).<ref> W.V. Quine, ''On What There Is'' (Washington, D.C. : Catholic University of America, Philosophy Education Society, 1948, OCLC 43235388)</ref>
 
 
 
=== The semantics of existence ===
 
In [[mathematical logic]], there are two quantifiers, "some" and "all," though as [[Franz Brentano|Brentano]] (1838-1917) pointed out, we can make do with just one quantifier and negation.  The first of these quantifiers, "some" is also expressed as "there exists."  Thus, in the sentence "There exist a man," the term "man" is asserted to be part of existence.  But we can also assert, "There exists a triangle."  Is a "triangle," an abstract idea, part of existence in the same way that a "man," a physical body, is part of existence?  Do  abstractions such as goodness, blindness, and virtue exist in the same sense that chairs, tables, and houses exist? What [[Categories (Aristotle)|categories]], or kinds of thing can be the subject or the predicate of a proposition?
 
 
 
Worse, does "existence" exist?<ref>Bertrand Russell, ''The Principles of Mathematics'' (New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Co., 1938, OCLC 3778306)</ref>
 
 
 
In some statements, existence is implied without being mentioned.  The statement "A bridge crosses the Thames at Hammersmith." cannot just be about a bridge, the Thames, and Hammersmith.  It must be about "existence" as well.  On the other hand, the statement "A bridge crosses the Styx at Limbo," has the same form, but while in the first case we understand a real bridge in the real world made of stone or brick, what "existence" would mean in the second case is less clear.
 
 
 
The [[nominalist]] approach is to argue that certain noun phrases can be "eliminated" by rewriting a sentence in a form that has the same meaning, but which does not contain the noun phrase. Thus [[William of Ockham|Ockham]] argued that "Socrates has wisdom," which apparently asserts the existence of a reference for "wisdom," can be rewritten as "Socrates is wise," which contains only the referring phrase "Socrates."  This method became widely accepted in the twentieth century by the [[Analytic philosophy|analytic school]] of philosophy.
 
 
 
However, this argument may be inverted by [[Philosophical realism|realists]] in arguing that since the sentence "Socrates is wise" can be rewritten as "Socrates has wisdom," this proves the existence of a hidden referent for "wise."
 
 
 
A further problem is that human beings seem to process information about fictional characters in much the same way that they proceess information about real people.  For example, in the 2008 United States presidential election, a politician and actor named [[Fred Thompson]] ran for the office of president.  In polls, potential voters identified Fred Thompson as a "law and order" candidate.  Thompson plays a fictional character on the television series ''[[Law & Order franchise|Law and Order]]''. There is no doubt that the people who make the comment are aware that ''Law and Order'' is fiction, but at some level, they process fiction as if it were fact.  Another example of this is the common experience of actresses who play the villain in a soap opera being accosted in public as if they are to blame for the actions of the character they play.
 
 
 
A scientist might make a clear distinction about objects that exist, and assert that all objects that exist are made up of either matter or energy.  But in the layperson's [[worldview]], existence includes real, fictional, and even contradictory objects.  Thus if we reason from the statement ''[[Pegasus]] flies'' to the statement ''Pegasus exists'', we are not asserting that Pegasus is made up of atoms, but rather that Pegasus exists in a particular worldview, the worldview of classical myth.  When a mathematicians reasons from the statement "ABC is a triangle" to the statement "triangles exist," she is not asserting that triangles are made up of atoms but rather that triangles exist within a particular [[mathematical model]].
 
 
 
==Modern approaches==
 
According to [[Bertrand Russell]]'s [[Theory of Descriptions]], the negation operator in a singular sentence takes wide and narrow scope: we distinguish between "some S is not P" (where negation takes "narrow scope") and "it is not the case that 'some S is P'" (where negation takes "wide scope"). The problem with this view is that there appears to be no such scope distinction in the case of proper names. The sentences "Socrates is not bald" and "it is not the case that Socrates is bald" both appear to have the same meaning, and they both appear to assert or presuppose the existence of someone (Socrates) who is not bald, so that negation takes narrow scope.
 
 
 
The theory of descriptions has generally fallen into disrepute, though there have been recent attempts to revive it by [[Stephen Neale]] and [[Frank Cameron Jackson|Frank Jackson]]. According to the [[Direct reference|direct-reference]] view, an early version of which was originally proposed by [[Bertrand Russell]], and perhaps earlier by [[Gottlob Frege]], a proper name strictly has no meaning when there is no object to which it refers. This view relies on the argument that the semantic function of a proper name is to tell us ''which'' object bears the name, and thus to identify some object. But no object can be identified if none exists.  Thus, a proper name must have a bearer if it is to be meaningful.
 
 
 
To adapt an argument of [[P. F. Strawson|Peter Strawson]]'s, someone who points to an apparently empty space, uttering "that's a fine red one" communicates nothing to someone who cannot see or understand what he is pointing to. Variants of the direct-reference view have been proposed by [[Saul Kripke]], [[Gareth Evans (philosopher)|Gareth Evans]], [[Nathan Salmon]], [[Scott Soames]], and others.
 
 
 
===Existence in the wide and narrow senses===
 
According to the "two sense" view of existence, which derives from [[Alexius Meinong]], existential statements fall into two classes. 
 
 
 
# Those asserting existence in a ''wide'' sense. These are typically of the form "N is P" for singular N, or "some S is P." 
 
# Those asserting existence in a ''narrow'' sense. These are typically of the form "N exists" or "S's exist."
 
 
 
The problem is then evaded as follows.  "Pegasus flies" implies existence in the wide sense, for it implies that ''something'' flies.  But it does not imply existence in the narrow sense, for we deny existence in this sense by saying that Pegasus does not exist.  In effect, the world of all things divides, on this view, into those (like [[Socrates]], the planet [[Venus]], and New York City) that have existence in the narrow sense, and those (like [[Sherlock Holmes]], the goddess [[Venus (mythology)|Venus]], and [[Minas Tirith]]) that do not.
 
 
 
However, common sense suggests the non-existence of such things as [[fictional character]]s or places.
 
 
 
=== European views ===
 
Influenced by the views of Brentano's pupil [[Alexius Meinong]], and by [[Edmund Husserl]], Germanophone and Francophone philosophy took a different direction regarding the question of existence. [[Existentialism]] has been a major strand of [[continental philosophy]] in the twentieth century.
 
  
 
==Notes==
 
==Notes==
 
<references/>
 
<references/>
  
== See also ==  
+
== References==  
* ''[[Cogito ergo sum]]''
+
*Aristotle. ''The Metaphysics.'' Translated by Hugh Lawson-Tancred. London: Penguin Books, 1998. ISBN 0140446192
* [[Cosmological argument]]
+
*Arnauld, Antoine, and Pierre Nicole. ''Logic, or, The Art of Thinking: Containing, Besides Common Rules, Several New Observations Appropriate for Forming Judgment.'' Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. ISBN 0521482496
* [[Existence proof]]
+
*Eagleton, Terry. ''The Meaning of Life.'' Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. ISBN 0199210705
* [[Gödel's ontological proof]]
+
*Edwards, Paul (ed.). ''The Encyclopedia of Philosophy.'' New York: Macmillan, 1967. ISBN 978-0028949901
* [[Meaning of life (philosophy)|Meaning of life]]
+
*Heidegger, Martin. ''Being and Time''. Translated by John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson. New York: Harper & Row, 1962. ISBN 0060638508
* [[Metaphysics]]
+
*Heraclitus. ''Fragments''. Translated by Brooks Hexton. New York: Penguin Books, 2003. ISBN 0142437654
* [[Ontology]]
+
*Loux, Michael J. ''Ockham's Theory Of Terms.'' London: University of Notre Dame Press, 1974. ISBN 0268005508
* [[Solipsism]]
+
*Magee, Bryan. ''The Story of Philosophy.'' New York: DK Pub., 1998. ISBN 078943511X
* [[Three marks of existence]]
+
*Mill, John Stuart. ''A System of Logic.'' London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1884.
 +
*Morewedge, Parviz (ed.). ''Philosophies of Existence: Ancient and Medieval.'' New York: Fordham University Press, 1982. ISBN 082321060X
 +
*Ogden, Schubert. ''The Reality of God and Other Essays''. Dallas, TX: Southern Methodist University Press, 1992. ISBN 087074318X
 +
*Plato. ''The Republic.'' Translated by Sir Henry Desmond Pritchard Lee. London: Penguin Books, 2003. ISBN 0140449140
 +
*Quine, W.V. ''Ontological Relativity and Other Essays''. New York: Columbia University Press, 1969. ISBN 0231033079
 +
*Quine, W.V. ''From a Logical Point of View''. Harvard University Press, 1980. ISBN 978-0674323513
 +
*Stern, S.M., Albert Hourani, and Vivian Brown (eds.). ''Islamic Philosophy and the Classical Tradition: Essays Presented by His Friends and Pupils to Richard Waltzer on His Seventieth Birthday.'' University of South Carolina Press, 1972. ISBN 978-0872492714
 +
*Suárez, Francisco. ''Disputationes Metaphysicae: Disputationes IV, V, VI, VII (Latin Edition)'' Independently published, 2020. ISBN 979-8637680733.
  
== References==  
+
== External links ==  
*Arnauld, Antoine and Pierre Nicole. ''Logic, or, The art of thinking : containing, besides common rules, several new observations appropriate for forming judgment'', Cambridge [England] ; New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1996. ISBN 0521482496
+
All links retrieved September 26, 2023.  
*Mill, John Stuart ''A System of Logic'',London, Longmans, green, and co., 1884. OCLC 1261114
 
*Loux, Michael J. ''Ockham's Theory Of Terms'' Notre Dame ; London : University of Notre Dame Press, 1974. ISBN 0268005508
 
  
==Further reading==
+
*[https://www.ontology.co/existence.htm The Concept of Existence: History and Definitions by Leading Philosophers] ''The Concept of Existence: Definitions by Major Philosophers''.  
* Plato, ''The Republic'', translated by Sir Henry Desmond Pritchard Lee. London ; New York : Penguin Books, 2003. ISBN 0140449140
+
*[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/existence/ Existence] ''Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy''.  
* Aristotle, ''The Metaphysics'', translated by Hugh Lawson-Tancred. London ; New York : Penguin Books, 1998. ISBN 0140446192
 
* Heraclitus, ''Fragments'', translated by Brooks Hexton. New York : Penguin Books, 2003. ISBN 0142437654
 
* Eagleton,Terry. ''The Meaning of Life''. Oxford ; New York : Oxford University Press, 2007. ISBN 0199210705
 
* Magee, Bryan. ''The Story of Philosophy''. New York : DK Pub., 1998. ISBN 078943511X
 
  
== External links ==  
+
===General philosophy sources===
All links retrieved November 12, 2007.
 
{{wiktionary|existence}}
 
* [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/existence/ Existence] on the [[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]
 
* [http://www.formalontology.it/existence.htm Existence. Definitions from leading philosophers]
 
* [http://www.interragation.com A documentary project about the meaning of life.]
 
{{Philosophy (navigation)}}
 
  
<!-- [[Category:Philosophy]] too general —>
+
*[http://plato.stanford.edu/ Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]
 +
*[http://www.iep.utm.edu/ The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]
 +
*[http://www.bu.edu/wcp/PaidArch.html Paideia Project Online]
 +
*[http://www.gutenberg.org/ Project Gutenberg]
 +
 +
[[category:Philosophy and religion]]
 +
[[Category:philosophy]]
  
[[Category:Philosophy and religion]]
+
{{Philosophy (navigation)}}
  
{{credit|170437594}}
+
{{credit|Existence|170437594}}

Latest revision as of 10:29, 26 September 2023

The Being according to Parmenidesis like the mass of a sphere.

Being and existence in philosophy are related and somewhat overlapping with respect to their meanings. Classical Greek had no independent word of "existence." The word "existence," as distinguished from the word "being," arose in the Middle Ages. Influenced by Islamic philosophy that recognized the contingency of the created world as compared with God the Creator, Christian philosophers such as Thomas Aquinas used the Latin word "existere" ("to exist" or "to appear") as distinct from "esse" ("to be") or "essentia" ("essence"). The Medieval distinction between essence and existence in the world, however, was critiqued by later theologians and philosophers for various reasons.

Modern existentialism maintained the distinction between essence and existence, but reversed the Medieval priority of essence over existence. The German philosopher Martin Heidegger, who critiqued the Thomistic theory of the causal relationship of difference between God and the world as well as its related theory of the distinction between essence and existence, dealt with the question of being in a very new way that involved the human being as Dasein ("being-there"), which to him is synonymous with existence.

The majority of analytic philosophers have rejected the distinction of being and existence. But, for philosophers and theologians who consider the distinction between being and existence an important one, there are two significant issues: teleology and individuation or embodiment. For what purpose do individual things exist? How do things become individual embodiments of their corresponding universals? A notable approach to the first issue was proposed by the American theologian Schubert Ogden, who combined existentialism with process theism to explain the unity of reality centering on God's aim. The Spanish Jesuit Francisco Suárez approached the second issue by proposing that the form and matter of a substance in union determine the individuality of that embodied substance.

Relationship of being and existence

Greek philosophy

History shows a rather complex relationship between being and existence. The classical Greek equivalent of the English verb "be" was "einai," but there seems to have been no classical Greek equivalent of the English verb "exist." It was only in the Middle Ages that the Latin word "exsistere" was made from a combination of "ex" ("out of") and "sistere" ("to cause to stand") to mean "to exist," "to appear," or "to emerge." The reason why classical Greek did not have any distinct concept of "exist" was that in Greek philosophy from Parmenides to Aristotle the primary project was a veridical one of articulating truthfulness in reality through copula sentences of the form "X is Y."[1] The theory of predication was central, and the theory of existence peripheral. So, even when Greek philosophers wanted to express the concept of existence, they did so only in the predicative form; "X exists" was expressed as "X is something." Thus, the word "einai" ("be") had to be used more widely than its predicative meaning. It was in the context of this wider use of "einai" ("be") that Aristotle referred to the concept of existence as "hoti esti" ("that it is") as distinguished from "ti esti" ("what it is"), which would mean essence.

Of course, in late Greek philosophy the old Greek verb "hyparkein" (originally, "to make a beginning") started to be used non-technically to mean "to exist"; but, it and its early Latin rendering "exsistere" still continued somewhat ambiguously to retain the predicative meaning as well, and furthermore the use of the noun exsistentia ("existence") was not popular yet.

Medieval Christian philosophy

Eventually, however, the concept of "existentia" ("existence") was established amongst Medieval Christian philosophers such as St. Thomas Aquinas as a technical term contrasted with "essentia" ("essence"), an abstract form of the presumed present participle of "esse" ("to be"). While essence apparently meant "what a thing is," existence meant "that a thing exists." According to Charles H. Khan, this development of the modern sense of existence occurred under the influence of Islamic philosophy, which distinguished existence (wujud) from essence (mahiat) in its radical revision of Greek ontology in light of a biblical metaphysics of creation within Islam which distinguished the created world (contingency) from God (necessity).[1] Aquinas adopted this, maintaining that the essence and existence of each and every contingent, finite creature are distinct, while essence and existence are identical within God, who is therefore preeminent over the world. According to him, God causes each and every finite creature to "exist" with its "essence."

Aquinas, however, indicated this causal relationship of difference between God and the world in terms of the "analogia entis" ("analogy of being"), referring to God and each finite creature as "ipsum esse subsistens" (Self-subsistent Being) and "ens" (being), respectively. This means that in spite of the development of "existentia" ("existence") as a new word with a distinctive meaning in the Middle Ages, still the term "esse" ("to be") was used more generally to cover the meaning of existence as well. Modern existentialism's emphasis upon the priority of existence over essence was still alien.

Later criticisms of the Thomistic position

The Thomistic distinction between essence and existence in the created world was criticized by later theologians and philosophers for various reasons. Critics include Duns Scotus, Francisco Suárez, René Descartes, Gottfried Leibniz, David Hume, and Immanuel Kant. But, especially existentialim's criticism was notable because of its attempt to reverse the order of priority between essence and existence. Søren Kierkegaard denied the importance of the objective essence of a thing in favor of the subjective appropriation of it. He, thus, held that there is no truth in objective knowledge of essence itself, and that the truth about reality is revealed only in the human subject's "passion of the infinite" as a believer. In talking about the essence and existence of a human being, Jean-Paul Sartre, for whom existentialism meant an atheistic humanism, went so far as to say that because there is no Creator, existence precedes essence.

The most notable critic, however, was the German philosopher Martin Heidegger. According to Heidegger, Aquinas' theory of the causal relationship of difference between God and the world through the analogy of being, and his related theory of the distinction between essence and existence in the world, are far from answering the fundamental question of the meaning of being, which was not answered in the long philosophical tradition in the West anyway because being itself was taken for granted as self-evident or undefinable. Therefore, in order to let the human being constantly pursue the question of "being" (Sein), Heidegger referred to that human being as "Dasein" (literally "being-there"), who, as a "being-in-the-world" (In-der-Welt-sein) thrown out to the temporal and phenomenological world of "beings" (Seiendes), is faced with angst and mortality there, but who nevertheless is expected to experience authenticity by standing in the openness of "being" in the midst of "beings." Here, the sense of "being" to be experienced is pre-conceptual and non-propositional in the everyday situation of human life; and the causal relationship of difference between God as "Self-subsistent Being" (ipsum esse subsistens) and the created world of "beings" (ens) in Aquinas' metaphysics is superseded by the distinction between "being" (Sein) and "beings" (Seiendes) in Heidegger's phenomenological ontology in pursuit of the meaning of "being." For Heidegger, the word "existence" (Existenz) is simply synonymous with Dasein: "The 'essence' of Dasein lies in its existence."[2]

Being and existence in analytic philosophy

Actualism

Many analytic philosophers in the twentieth century such as Gottlob Frege, Bertrand Russell, and W.V. Quine, believed that being and existence are identical, that is, that what there is, is precisely what exists. It is basically so-called "actualism," and it maintains that there is no kind of being beyond actual existence. The identity of being and existence also means that every predicative proposition can be translated into an existential one without changing meaning. For example, adding "exists" to "a wise man" to give the complete sentence "A wise man exists" has the same effect as joining "some man" to "wise" using the copula to say "Some man is wise." So, the "exists" of the existential proposition takes the place of the copula. This view is the basis of the dominant position in modern Anglo-American analytic philosophy: that existence is asserted by the existential quantifier.

Possibilism

Of course, there is a school called "possibilism," which distinguishes between being and existence, that is, between what there is and what exists, saying that the latter comprises a relatively small portion of the former. According to this, although there are things that actually exist, there are also things that do not exist: they are what there merely are, not having existence or actuality, which only things that actually exist have. Such things are non-existent possible things like Santa Claus, unicorns, aliens, and people that were never born. They could have actually existed, but as it happens, they simply do not. To this possibilist realm of the non-existent, some of the followers of Alexius Meinong such as Terence Parsons would add impossible objects like square circles and wooden iron, which have contradictory properties.

Adjusted possibilism

But, scholars such as Quine, for whom there is no distinction between being and existence, have critiqued possibilism, by saying that we cannot embrace non-actual possible objects since there is no real criterion of identity for them: "No entity without identity."[3] This critique from Quine has given rise to an adjusted version of possibilism, which now agrees that being and existence are identical, saying that everything there is exists, but which nevertheless insists that not everything that exists is actual, that is, that there exist things that fail to be actual. This, however, looks like a word game, simply renaming being as "existence" and existence as "actuality." Thus, a more advanced version of possibilism, which takes Quine's objection more seriously, has been developed by David Kellogg Lewis.

Modal realism

While agreeing with the adjusted version just mentioned above that being and existence are identical, but that actuality is to be distinguished from existence, Lewis has a new understanding of actuality, treating it in terms of relation. Thus, according to Lewis, when people say that there are things that exist but are not actual, it means that there are things that are spatiotemporally unrelated to the world, although they exist in a full-fledged sense in other worlds. The word "actual," then, is an indexical, whose reference on any given occasion of utterance is determined by the context or world in which the utterance occurs. So, when one utter, "New York City is actual" (or more naturally, "New York City actually exists"), its truthfulness is made not because actuality is some intrinsic property of New York City but rather because New York City occupies the same world as the speaker. Lewis' version of possibilism is sometimes called "modal realism," and it is quite Quinean.

Different realms of reality

The issue on whether or not there are different worlds or realms of reality is not new. Ancient Greek philosophy observed that there are concrete, material beings in the spatiotemporal world in the sense of physical reality which is detectable by physical senses or physical instruments, while there are also ideas and values such as love, justice, and good which however are not of the same physically sensible material. For Plato, those ideas and values in an incorporeal realm of the world are real beings because they are self-existent and immutable, while material beings in the corporeal world are merely their ephemeral "shadows" far from real beings. For Aristotle, by contrast, only individual things called substances in the spatiotemporal world are fully existent beings, and other beings, called categories, such as relation, quantity, time and place, and Plato's ideas and values, have a derivative kind of being, dependent on those individual things. In the Middle Ages, based upon a biblical metaphysics of creation, the notion of existence was established to show the emergence of the created world, distinguishable from being in general and also from essence.

The Plato-Aristotle tension above was echoed in the Medieval controversy between realism and nominalism. The approach of realists was to argue that the sentence "Socrates is wise," which contains a noun reference only for "Socrates," can be rewritten as "Socrates has wisdom," which apparently proves the existence of a reference for "wisdom" as well. This argument, however, was inverted by nominalists such as William of Ockham in arguing that "Socrates has wisdom" can be rewritten as "Socrates is wise," which contains a reference only for "Socrates." The nominalist method has basically been inherited in analytic philosophy, which holds that there is hardly any kind of being beyond actual existence.

Teleology, being, and existence

The teleological nature of reality was discussed by Plato and Aristotle. Plato identified the Idea of the Good as the ultimate cause or measure in the whole of reality, saying that things that are gain their usefulness or value from it. Aristotle maintained that each substance has its final cause, which guides it throughout various changes it goes through to reach what it is. According to him, the final cause is virtually identical with the formal and efficient causes because all these can be attributed to the form of each substance, which is immanent in it, although God as "pure form" is the ultimate final, formal, and efficient cause, towards which all things tend. This teleological approach does not believe that the final causes of different substances are incompatible with one other, but rather that they are for one another. Hence, "extrinsic finality," through which the harmonious relationship of different individuals is made possible, is distinguished from the "intrinsic finality" of each individual, through which it is directed towards what it is.[4] Aristotle's teleology was inherited to the creationist theology of Thomas Aquinas and others in the Catholic Church.

With the coming of the modern period, philosophers began to question teleology. Francis Bacon and René Descartes cautioned against the abusive attribution of Aristotelian final causes to various things and events. One of the few exceptions was Gottfried Leibniz' notion of "pre-established harmony" of monads programmed by God. Immanuel Kant rejected not only the Aristotelian teleology of nature, but also the possibility of traditional metaphysics itself. Kant limited teleology to the subjective realm of mind and explored its possibility within the realms of ethics and aesthetics. Although Hegel temporally revived teleology in his speculative metaphysics, most post-Hegelian philosophers were not interested in ontology with its teleology of nature.

Analytic philosophers refused metaphysics itself and limited the question of teleology to the realm of conceptual analysis of languages. However, in the twentieth century, Martin Heidegger brought back ontology as a central question of philosophy. Combining the two trends of thought of his time, phenomenology and hermeneutics, Heidegger developed ontology as a hermeneutic phenomenology. Within the framework of hermeneutic phenomenology, which still incorporated the Kantian skepticism of speculative metaphysics, he discussed the teleology of being, conceptualizing the interconnected mode of human existence as "being-in-the-world" (In-der-Welt-sein).

Also with the emergence and development of existentialism, the question of the purposiveness, value, and relatedness of being has been addressed in a new way. Martin Buber, for example, dealt with it in the context of the "I-Thou" relationship. Gabriel Marcel came up with the mutual, communal activity of being. However, although Buber and Marcel were theists, existentialism in general has often been critiqued of being fundamentally humanistic. Therefore, any teleology or theory of value developed by existentialism, no matter how insightful it may sound, has tended to be blamed for being self-made. At the same time, traditional Aristotelian teleology has been criticized of not being able to successfully establish the true relations not only amongst different individual substances but also between them and God because of the Aristotelian notion of God as self-contained "pure form" or "unmoved mover." To address these possible weaknesses of both existentialism and Aristotelianism, Schubert Ogden proposed to link the experiencing human subject in existentialism and the experiencing God of dipolarity in process thought, hoping that the linkage of existentialist humanism and process theism in this regard would bring in a situation in which the unity of the whole of reality is realized centering on God's aim.[5]

Existence as individuation or embodiment

The world of phenomena is the world where many particular things exist. Each particular thing is considered to have been developed or determined from its corresponding category or universal idea. The universal idea, then, is considered to have been individuated or embodied in that particular thing.

Catholic philosophy

Medieval Catholic philosophy dealt with the issue of individuation. According to Thomas Aquinas, the cause of individuation is matter, because different horses, for example, result when their common universal idea of "horseness" is individuated by matter in each of them. It is just like today many different cars of the same model come into existence when its common mold is stamped to materials, which therefore turn out to be the cause of individuation. Aquinas called matter with this function "materia quantitate signata" ("matter signed in quantity"). According to Duns Scotus, however, formless matter, which is itself indeterminate, cannot serve to make "horseness" into this horse or that horse. Although horseness itself may be common and repeatable, the horseness of this horse is to be distinguished from that of that horse. Scotus held, therefore, that individuation is caused by a determination called a haecceitas ("thisness"). It is not a bare particular in the sense of a substance but rather a non-qualitative property of a substance. It is something like a form. Francisco Suárez, a Spanish Jesuit philosopher in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth century, went one step further, by maintaining that the principle of individuation is both this matter and this form of a substance in union, although the form is the chief principle: adaequatum individuationis principium esse hanc materiam et hanc formam inter se unitas, inter quae praecipuum principium est forma.[6]

Religion

In many religions such as Hinduism, Taoism, Confucianism, and Christianity, enlightened people are considered to be individual embodiments of universal truth. Concrete existence is understood to have an intricate relationship with truth. Daoism, for example, sees Lao Tzu as the embodiment of Tao. In Christianity, Jesus said, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6). Here, truth is even understood not as some kind of property or object one can possess or lose, but as existence itself. So, Jesus did not say, "I have the truth," but "I am the truth." Christian theology identifies him as the Logos Incarnate. Avatamsaka Sutra in Buddhism describes the world as the manifestation of truth.

Notes

  1. 1.0 1.1 Charles H. Kahn, "Why Existence Does Not Emerge as a Distinct Concept in Greek Philosophy?" in Philosophies of Existence: Ancient and Medieval, ed. Parviz Morewedge (New York: Fordham University Press, 1982).
  2. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, tr. John Macquarrie & Edward Robinson (New York: Harper & Row, 1962), 67.
  3. W.V. Quine, Ontological Relativity and Other Essays (New York: Columbia University Press, 1969), 23.
  4. Teleology The Catholic Encyclopedia. Retrieved May 26, 2021.
  5. Schubert Ogden, The Reality of God and Other Essays (Dallas, TX: Southern Methodist University Press, 1992).
  6. Francisco Suárez, Disputationes Metaphysicae: Disputationes IV, V, VI, VII (Latin Edition) (Independently published, 2020, ISBN 979-8637680733).

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  • Aristotle. The Metaphysics. Translated by Hugh Lawson-Tancred. London: Penguin Books, 1998. ISBN 0140446192
  • Arnauld, Antoine, and Pierre Nicole. Logic, or, The Art of Thinking: Containing, Besides Common Rules, Several New Observations Appropriate for Forming Judgment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. ISBN 0521482496
  • Eagleton, Terry. The Meaning of Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. ISBN 0199210705
  • Edwards, Paul (ed.). The Encyclopedia of Philosophy. New York: Macmillan, 1967. ISBN 978-0028949901
  • Heidegger, Martin. Being and Time. Translated by John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson. New York: Harper & Row, 1962. ISBN 0060638508
  • Heraclitus. Fragments. Translated by Brooks Hexton. New York: Penguin Books, 2003. ISBN 0142437654
  • Loux, Michael J. Ockham's Theory Of Terms. London: University of Notre Dame Press, 1974. ISBN 0268005508
  • Magee, Bryan. The Story of Philosophy. New York: DK Pub., 1998. ISBN 078943511X
  • Mill, John Stuart. A System of Logic. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1884.
  • Morewedge, Parviz (ed.). Philosophies of Existence: Ancient and Medieval. New York: Fordham University Press, 1982. ISBN 082321060X
  • Ogden, Schubert. The Reality of God and Other Essays. Dallas, TX: Southern Methodist University Press, 1992. ISBN 087074318X
  • Plato. The Republic. Translated by Sir Henry Desmond Pritchard Lee. London: Penguin Books, 2003. ISBN 0140449140
  • Quine, W.V. Ontological Relativity and Other Essays. New York: Columbia University Press, 1969. ISBN 0231033079
  • Quine, W.V. From a Logical Point of View. Harvard University Press, 1980. ISBN 978-0674323513
  • Stern, S.M., Albert Hourani, and Vivian Brown (eds.). Islamic Philosophy and the Classical Tradition: Essays Presented by His Friends and Pupils to Richard Waltzer on His Seventieth Birthday. University of South Carolina Press, 1972. ISBN 978-0872492714
  • Suárez, Francisco. Disputationes Metaphysicae: Disputationes IV, V, VI, VII (Latin Edition) Independently published, 2020. ISBN 979-8637680733.

External links

All links retrieved September 26, 2023.

General philosophy sources


Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.