Define "being"

[boagie]

Are we talking about being as the self, the personality and/or in the form of personal identity? Being I would say is an ability to experience the world. If it is really identity of which we speak, identity is formed through experience's discretion and exclusion of all things it deems other.

[Fido]

Originally Posted by midas77

Nothing defines Being. Definition is an attempt to limit a subject. The only thing that can limit Being is "nothing". As all of you have guess, nothing nothings. Hence you can not add something in the knowledge of Being that will not includes itself. Tautology. Its unescapable.

One side of being, Existence cannot be concieved, so it cannot be defined. On the near end of being, life is purely phenomenal to all that know life, and life cannot be defined except in the most general or subjective terms. In between these two extremes is reality, from the word, Res, meaning: thing. We cannot fully define reality because we cannot define its two ends fully. That does not mean we cannot give some definition to reality, or know something of it. It is the only facet of being of which we can know anything in an objective sense, since others share reality as a phenomenon. Thanks.

[midas77]

Originally Posted by Fido

One side of being, Existence cannot be concieved, so it cannot be defined. On the near end of being, life is purely phenomenal to all that know life, and life cannot be defined except in the most general or subjective terms. In between these two extremes is reality, from the word, Res, meaning: thing. We cannot fully define reality because we cannot define its two ends fully. That does not mean we cannot give some definition to reality, or know something of it. It is the only facet of being of which we can know anything in an objective sense, since others share reality as a phenomenon. Thanks.

On side of being, Existence... What is the other side then, "non-existence?"

Existence can not be conceived....Do you mean we can not know it? We have an immediate apprehension of Existence. Existence eludes definition because any predication we subscribe to it will contain itself, hence tautology.

I'm using the term definition in the way classical logic uses them, that is to set the boundary to the subject by means of predication. WE can know Being but we can not define it. Definition is not the only means for acquiring knowledge. In logic it is called, simple apprehension.

[vajrasattva]

i think for the most part we think of being as a finite entity, and as such we apply the term being to ourselves. But in my view being includes the totality of what you are. Which includes what you know and what you do and where your are and where you do things, because what you are includes what you do and know and many other unfathomable things. So being is the totality of ones own existence.

[boagie]

Originally Posted by vajrasattva

i think for the most part we think of being as a finite entity, and as such we apply the term being to ourselves. But in my view being includes the totality of what you are. Which includes what you know and what you do and where your are and where you do things, because what you are includes what you do and know and many other unfathomable things. So being is the totality of ones own existence.

vajrasattva,

In trying to make a visual out of it, would it be fair to say, that if one invisioned a large transparent cube, representing a complexity of your relations, with you imbeded wihin this transparent cube of your history and relations spanning out in all directions similtaneously, you are the centre, yet you are the full context of your own universe. Your it! That would be the vision of the wiseman of the mountaintop.

[midas77]

It seems we are talking of different "beings". I subscribe to Martin Heidegger's basic differentiation of being=entities or things, Being=that which makes all beings being. Another meaning of being that seems to surface in this 4 pages thread is the being as in my well-being which i see as consciousness.

vajrasattva, there is one part of Indian Philosophy I really like. The Athman-Brahman view of the "universe". When we inquire outside what we end up with is Brahman, the Ultimate Thing, and we inquire inside, what we see is Athman, the Ultimate self. That philosophical concept is very very old but I am really mesmerized by the beauty of it. To think of it, the very foundation of reality is in actuality is the very root to which my self is made, enthralls me.

[Zetherin]

Originally Posted by midas77

It seems we are talking of different "beings". I subscribe to Martin Heidegger's basic differentiation of being=entities or things, Being=that which makes all beings being. Another meaning of being that seems to surface in this 4 pages thread is the being as in my well-being which i see as consciousness.

vajrasattva, there is one part of Indian Philosophy I really like. The Athman-Brahman view of the "universe". When we inquire outside what we end up with is Brahman, the Ultimate Thing, and we inquire inside, what we see is Athman, the Ultimate self. That philosophical concept is very very old but I am really mesmerized by the beauty of it. To think of it, the very foundation of reality is in actuality is the very root to which my self is made, enthralls me.

Yeah, there seems to be a battle of semantics more than anything else!

[Fido]

Originally Posted by midas77

It seems we are talking of different "beings". I subscribe to Martin Heidegger's basic differentiation of being=entities or things, Being=that which makes all beings being. Another meaning of being that seems to surface in this 4 pages thread is the being as in my well-being which i see as consciousness.

vajrasattva, there is one part of Indian Philosophy I really like. The Athman-Brahman view of the "universe". When we inquire outside what we end up with is Brahman, the Ultimate Thing, and we inquire inside, what we see is Athman, the Ultimate self. That philosophical concept is very very old but I am really mesmerized by the beauty of it. To think of it, the very foundation of reality is in actuality is the very root to which my self is made, enthralls me.

Ah serbcribe to Popeye's tangent: that if yers eat beings, theys make ya fart. Sa thair.

[as0l0]

I believe that Heidegger says something like...

being is a thing that has an issue with it's own existence...

I don't disagree.

[midas77]

Fido, depends on what being you eat, I mean the fart will certainly smells differently.