Define "being"

@saiboimushi,

being is an awareness of self based on your surroundings, having a mind (not just a brain), some people sometimes ask, what about babies? are they human beings? personally i say that babies are human no doubt but i think a distictio needs to be made between human beings and human becomings. until the mind develops and the baby starts to have an awareness of self only then, in my view, can it be a human being.

@filosofired,

filosofired;89971 wrote:

being is an awareness of self based on your surroundings, having a mind (not just a brain), some people sometimes ask, what about babies? are they human beings? personally i say that babies are human no doubt but i think a distictio needs to be made between human beings and human becomings. until the mind develops and the baby starts to have an awareness of self only then, in my view, can it be a human being.

The question with infants of whether they are human needs no answer... They are not rabbits, and their tissue is their own, and human... The true question is whether they should have rights, and if we defend the rights of every person to their own body which is sinequanon to civil rights and freedom means denial of human rights to this human life... We make a mistake when we consider life as given, conceived, or created... Certainly conception must preceed birth, but the life has been there from the beginning, and that being, that life, is one we share with all living beings, and perhaps only here of all places in the cosmos... We take life for granted, but it is given with a promise... All our ancestors die when we die and we die for good if we do not hand off our being to new life... This is not an invitation to mass production, but to simple reproduction...

@Fido,

Fido;89983 wrote:

. All our ancestors die when we die and we die for good if we do not hand off our being to new life... This is not an invitation to mass production, but to simple reproduction...

Possibly. But maybe there is a transcendental being which some people call life? In which case, life has more meaning than simply procreation.

Rich

@saiboimushi,

I know I can't define it.

@Twilight Siren,

Being? Quality, state or attribute? If it is either it must have identifiable components upon which we as humans can agree or disagree upon.

Cognition is the process of thought. To think implies a consciousness which perceives. Thought implies being.' Therefore I am I think.' Beings has the attribute and ability to think, to postulate a position and shape ones thoughts into language. The ability of the process of turning thought into language is IMHO a key indicator of being.

Consciousness, perception and feeling are all part of Being. Being, the state of life is that which we are. We are an individual Self that grows and develops over the duration of our life, in essence we Become. That Becoming is both a combination of interior and exterior factors which contribute to our growth and development of Self.

Or do people prefer to imply/comprehend that Being is the Tabula Rasa from which Consciousness and hence the Self emerges?

@richrf,

richrf;89990 wrote:

Possibly. But maybe there is a transcendental being which some people call life? In which case, life has more meaning than simply procreation.

Rich

Life is not alone being, and yet, to us it being alone ... Nothing is real without us, and we are at the end of a long chain of life leading the beginning of all life, and then, in a moment it could all be over... The future's uncertain and the end is always near... Life has not meaning, but means all....

Procreation may be the success of certain individuals, but it is the survival of communities, and of socieities, and of nations.... People as a group survive just as bees, or ants, when those who can breed breed, and those who can support support. To have so many parents, each one thinking of himself as an individual and unable to rely upon other such individuals for the improvement and sustenence of their children, society's children means that here, as in old Greece, many housholds fall empty for want of wives and children....The luxury society has no use for children... Children eat up every excess, and without children even the common man can enjoy leisure...Well, even if we do not, as individuals have use for the children of others, we should still sacrifice for the survival of society, and together...The problem with individuals is that they too often see nothing beyond their own lives, and sick at heart for the want of meaning hasten their ends with party... As they end the society ends, and as children end societies die...The one fact that cannot be hidden from any is when society is rotten, corrupt, and immoral... Societies do not suffer only a little immorality... They go rotten together... Don't point your finger at the filthy rich and say they stink... They are no more stinking than those who allow what they do knowing they will never do so, and then try...And in this fashion the wealth, the heart, vitality, and love are drained out of society, and the laughter of children grows rare...

Have I inflated the balloon???

---------- Post added 09-14-2009 at 07:44 AM ----------

Paracelsus;90048 wrote:

Being? Quality, state or attribute? If it is either it must have identifiable components upon which we as humans can agree or disagree upon.

Cognition is the process of thought. To think implies a consciousness which perceives. Thought implies being.' Therefore I am I think.' Beings has the attribute and ability to think, to postulate a position and shape ones thoughts into language. The ability of the process of turning thought into language is IMHO a key indicator of being.

Consciousness, perception and feeling are all part of Being. Being, the state of life is that which we are. We are an individual Self that grows and develops over the duration of our life, in essence we Become. That Becoming is both a combination of interior and exterior factors which contribute to our growth and development of Self.

Or do people prefer to imply/comprehend that Being is the Tabula Rasa from which Consciousness and hence the Self emerges?

Being is all, so there will never be anything to compare it to, or define it by... On top of that, it is an infinite, and does not only exist beyond unplumbable space, but in time beyond reckoning, and while we can imagine a cause for the effects we see we can fathom no purpose...We are not from this perspective like a face considering a hand, but a hand considering a face knowing only what it feels... We can think about it and talk about it, but to say at the end that we know anything is a lie... We would sooner with truth talk about the bottom of the sea as though it were our navel...

---------- Post added 09-14-2009 at 07:49 AM ----------

Twilight Siren;89997 wrote:

I know I can't define it.

Knowing ones limits has saved every life once or twice...

@Fido,

Fido;90106 wrote:

---------- Post added 09-14-2009 at 07:44 AM ----------
Being is all, so there will never be anything to compare it to, or define it by... On top of that, it is an infinite, and does not only exist beyond unplumbable space, but in time beyond reckoning, and while we can imagine a cause for the effects we see we can fathom no purpose...We are not from this perspective like a face considering a hand, but a hand considering a face knowing only what it feels... We can think about it and talk about it, but to say at the end that we know anything is a lie.

I fail to follow your logic,that is if any here is here are you really saying that we can not know or experience being, when actually we live it?

Perception of sensory experience allows me to distinguish between the face and the hand, the information that they relay to the brain is quite different in its perceived quality.

What do you mean that 'we can think about it and talk about it, but to say at the end we know anything is a lie'. This is absurd it flies in the face of what philosophy is maybe to its all sound and fury signifying nothing. Sorry if anyone is being absurd here its you. What is a fact? what is a perception? what is an idea, more so they have qualities which can be verified and assessed resulting in the creation of a truth effect.:poke-eye:
I have to ask what sort of philosophy do you subscribe to?

@Paracelsus,

Paracelsus;90214 wrote:

I fail to follow your logic,that is if any here is here are you really saying that we can not know or experience being, when actually we live it?

Perception of sensory experience allows me to distinguish between the face and the hand, the information that they relay to the brain is quite different in its perceived quality.

What do you mean that 'we can think about it and talk about it, but to say at the end we know anything is a lie'. This is absurd it flies in the face of what philosophy is maybe to its all sound and fury signifying nothing. Sorry if anyone is being absurd here its you. What is a fact? what is a perception? what is an idea, more so they have qualities which can be verified and assessed resulting in the creation of a truth effect.:poke-eye:
I have to ask what sort of philosophy do you subscribe to?

I will not say I am sorry, and then beat the philosophical crap out of you...Instead, let me trash you... Our lives, our form of being is the only lens we have through which to view all life... You could tell if you had a booger on your lens if you could turn it to a new scene...Instead, we are left with the single lens and the single scene not being able to tell for certain what we are seeing, whether it is what we want to see, or some flaw in our own being...In fact, we are seeing, or trying to see far beyond our own sight..

From my perspective, people do not want knowledge so much as certainty... They do not want to know, but to feel certain they know, and for that reason they more often seek faith than true knowledge...If the question is, what can we know then the answer must be limited, as all true knowledge is limited...From the point of view of the individual without children and cut off from parents, then nothing is real... Individualism is nihilism, because If I say I exist alone it is because I have denied all human meaning which one need not do to say we all exist, in time and space, and not just living for a moment...So my philosophy, if I have one, is humanism, but I am a moralist, and I expect my philosophy spans the reach between those book ends...

I cannot know all no matter how much I crave certainty... I can know enough to presume human feelings to even the lowliest beasts and critters, and wish to minimize our collective pain... It takes nothing from life to be kind, gentle, and understanding...The quality of life is such that it makes us all THE REALITY...And we are; only not as individuals, and if we give up certainty, and only consider the possibilities then we can know, but never know enough to do wrong out of the certainty that good lies beyond our grief..

@saiboimushi,

Hi
Fido: Our lives, our form of being is the only lens we have through which to view all life...
I can know enough to presume human feelings to even the lowliest beasts and critters, and wish to minimize our collective pain...

NS: With your vision restricted to a single lens, I can understand why you must "presume" these things, rather than 'know' them to be. But, why must you presume at all?

As concerns your own Being, no doubt is even possible (without self-contradiction). Making unwarranted assumptions about "critters, feelings, humanity, and pain," would be just one more 'faith based' preference, would it not? Aren't you including yourself in the group you describe as:
"...they more often seek faith than true knowledge..." (?)

@NonSum,

NonSum;90275 wrote:

Hi
Fido: Our lives, our form of being is the only lens we have through which to view all life...
I can know enough to presume human feelings to even the lowliest beasts and critters, and wish to minimize our collective pain...

NS: With your vision restricted to a single lens, I can understand why you must "presume" these things, rather than 'know' them to be. But, why must you presume at all?

As concerns your own Being, no doubt is even possible (without self-contradiction). Making unwarranted assumptions about "critters, feelings, humanity, and pain," would be just one more 'faith based' preference, would it not? Aren't you including yourself in the group you describe as:
"...they more often seek faith than true knowledge..." (?)

Your vision is not better than mine...I have seen it all...I have tasted the fruit of all philosophy, and read in every branch of philosophy including anthropology and history... I know what we are and have always been.. I know our limits, which are my own limits too, and yours... We can have finite knowlege, knowledge of finite reality... To this end we have our ideas, which are judgements and classifications based upon finite knowledge... But of infintes like existence we can know only of that part that is finite in nature... We may know of our own lives, but of all being we cannot say because if done correctly, and with luck that terrible curse, that our being will be an infinite...In any event, what we can say of being is restricted to what we can know, which is our own little end of the thing...

As far as faith and knowledge, what is possible is certain, to a point if all possibilities are considered, but this is a far stretch from saying what exactly will happen and why... The deck is in the air, and we can say each will land face up or down, but not which...People want to know how their cards will fall, and so they rig the game with forms like government, and even religion... The active use of form/ideas is to shape the future as it occurs, and to this end we must be certain of our actions and their outcome as if, we pray and give up this life for eternal life... But that is the form, a rigged game; but then, what if we cannot be certain of our forms, of our lives, and of our knowledge after all no matter what form we call our own??? We want certainty in our lives, and forms can give us this limited certainty... But the certainty of one when it leads to the uncertainty of all can not long be certain... So it is with faith... When the church just knew the sun rose and set, the scientist only with trepidation could advance where their reasonled them...Certainty is the enemy of truth... What do I know??? Not much, and perhaps enough....Knowledge is life...Death grows out of ignorence, or as the case may be, out of certainty because if we could justly say we do not know then we could never with equanimity kill...

@saiboimushi,

I would define being as love.

@saiboimushi,

Hi
Caroline: I would define being as love.

NS: Would you explain your reasons why you do?

Paracelsus: The Buddha spoke of having loving compassion for all humanity

NS: He is also attributed for saying: "Avoid fools." But, I never heard of Buddha saying that one should first berate those we consider to be fools. Do you think it would profit the (supposed) fool to be berated (a selfless act, no doubt)? Or, is it the berater that somehow gains by spending his valuable time in the effort?

@saiboimushi,

Why I describe love as being? Why not? Wouldn't you?

@saiboimushi,

Caroline: Why I describe love as being? Why not? Wouldn't you?

NS: It might be nice to do so, but I'm not sure 'nice' is sufficient grounds to make a good philosophical case. (Sorry, about the philosophical hangup.)

If 'love' is 'being,' then what is the phrase: 'being in love'? Is it a redundancy: 'love in love.' What of: 'being hateful' = 'love hateful'?
But, I don't 'love hateful.' Look what you have me saying? Why are you making me say such unloving things as this?

@saiboimushi,

There is no "being". There is only "becoming".
Reality is composed of events (process) not entities (matter).
The illuison of "being" is created by the influence of the past and incorporation of elements (prehension) of the past on the creation of the present moment.
All is flux, all is change, all is process.
One moment of experience perishes, a new moment of experience is born, incorporating elements of the past and choosing from among the possibilites of the future, in a never ending process of creative advance.
(process philosophy).

@prothero,

pothero

I agree about you with Becoming, I don't think all is in flux I do belive that there is the stillness of the center of the Self.

And does Becoming imply continual change? And if so do we change from this to that?

Are you defining Becoming as articulated by Deleuze?

@NonSum,

Flux can lead to becoming along with other things such as growth.

@Caroline,

To Become is not a conscious undertaking, its more of Zen thing if you will. Becoming incorporates the dynamics of the unconscious mind with the perceptual qualities of the conscious mind, to Become is to evolve.

Becoming has no fixed state but due its own momentum it does achieve rest, then progression.

To Become is to drop away conscious intention, if anything Becoming is very similar in its presentation and dynamics to improvised jazz.

@saiboimushi,

You know, I couldn't have put it better myself. Thanks.

@Paracelsus,

Paracelsus;90464 wrote:

prothero

I agree about you with Becoming, I don't think all is in flux I do belive that there is the stillness of the center of the Self.

And does Becoming imply continual change? And if so do we change from this to that?

Are you defining Becoming as articulated by Deleuze?

No my particular take would be process philosophy as espoused by A.N. Whitehead but any ontology in which becoming not being is primary is helpful.

There is a non changing aspect to this line of thought but it has to do with the realm of possibility (similar to Platonic idealism) as opposed to the realm of actuality. The divine is dipolar with an unchanging primordial nature and a changing consequential nature.

I am just one of those who cannot leave it at ineffable mystery even though I acknowledge the speculative nature of all philosophical systems.

Philosophy Forum

Quick Links

My Account

able2know