Does existence really precede essence?

@Fido,

Fido;125399 wrote:

Don't buy into a bunch of philosophical dogma...And Dogs are a good example now that I have them in mind...Do you think there is a difference between the dog and his essence??? We conceive of dogs by what is essential to all dogs, and what is essential to all dogs is essential to one dog, and yet, all dogs are different, so how can there be an essential dog that accepts all differences and finds a common bond between them???We conceive of all dogs spiritually, and it is this conception to the extent it reflects reality that is their essence- in our minds...But their essence, individually, or together is a notion inseperable from their being... We could not have the idea, the conception of the thing without the thing, but in the seeing of it, in the existing with it, our essence become easily confused with it, so Schopenhaur was correct to say, that when I die the world dies with me...Our being is essential to the perception of all being, and as with all being we conceive of ourselves spiritually, but the fact is not that ones essences or any things essence is a thing apart, but is one part of the whole...

Right you are.

Existence and essence are both intertwined in a way few people can actually grasp. To try to separate the two would be making the same Cartesian mistake which we must try to stray away from.

I believe all things have an essence, but that isn't the only essence that their existence hinges upon. There are many essences within essences, so it's hard to reduce anything down to one essence.

My world depends upon my existence and my essence. My world also influences others existence and essence, and likewise theirs mine. All the while making up a much bigger essence.

@hue-man,

If only the fruit of knowledge is eaten, the truth and purpose of life will always be overlooked.

Some may argue about the existence of a soul, but whatever ones' personal view the representation of soul is common, it is perceived to be the "source" of our life.
Essence simply means the essential "you", your base state of being.
Genetics is the code of traits and determines ones' predisposition to whatever talents one may have, height, shape, sex, strengths, vulnerabilities etc.
Thoughts and experiences are shaped by personal responses to outside stimuli, and will govern what one perceives to be "truth", even though one knows that what is true to oneself may not be true to another. Or, put another way, personal truth is only applicable to the particular knowledge of life held by the perceiver, which makes it an aspect of truth.

It is interesting that the words "apart" and "a part" are such antitheses of each other, and yet are separated by only one small "space".
I feel that the "search" for truth is separated from awareness of it because the "space" has been filled in by "knowledge" in attempts to reconcile the division.
If knowledge is removed from the search the actuality of truth becomes felt and visible. In a way the truth is a bridge between the two concepts and gives meaning to the whole.

For example: You exist and you live on a planet that also exists. In the knowledgeable sense this allows both "apart" and "a part" to exist in unison and be a true statement.
But to live in only that knowledge denies any meaning to both yours and the planets' existence, past survival that is.
To know the truth one must work backwards from knowledge and allow that while all knowledge stems from truth, knowledge is but a part of it.

Earth evolved all life including humankind. To deny this is to deny your heritage, why you were brought into being and to hide from truth. Sounds a bit like the beginning of the bible doesn't it?

The prime distinction between human and all other life forms is that humans are not hunted as prey. Human consciousness is given the benefits of free will without the detriments associated with a hunter/prey relationship.
This confers humanity with the freedom to function as the consciousness of Earth with the least effort possible, requiring nothing more of the human "cell" than to sustain itself by drawing life from its' Earth body.

The ways in which we accomplish this are unnecessarily malignant in nature and a cancer to our common body. The ways in which we use knowledge to manipulate both each other and Earth have little to do with truth, though the word is used incessantly to uphold the reasons for our actions.
So, existence exists, essence is the truth of it, and, like free will, has unlimited potential. But harmony will be elusive if knowledge is chosen over truth as the governing criteria.
After all is said and done, knowledge needs truth to exist; truth does not need knowledge, only recognition.

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;125432 wrote:

....there must be an essence of "dog".

@hue-man,

I apologize for posting again this quickly. I should have incorporated the two and been more concise. It is not my intention to be overbearing.

Recurrence is finite and infinite at the same time: This is the key to grasping the nature of the universe: It begins, ends and begins again; the recurring infinite heartbeat from which creation springs.
We tend to think of the soul as individual. This is wrong. The soul is common and is the source of all essence, which in turn is the source of all individual life.
It is recurrence that allows creation to exist in infinity to realize its potential.
The Earth is our soul, as is the universe of which it is part, it is all one, there is no separation.
We breathe the oxygen of Earths' lungs, are hydrated by Earths' water and are nourished by Earths' body. We do not merely live on Earth: We are Earth.

Perfection exists in everything, but only through recurrence can its form be seen.
To realize this is to realize that perfection is in the harmony of all things.
The Earth was already in harmony before humans were evolved into it.
This was Eden.
Human essence, which is consciousness, allows the potential of realizing this and thus for the universe, our common soul, to know itself.
Recurrence of essence allows for mistakes to be rectified, either during the lifespan of the essence, or its' next incarnation. The soul does not make mistakes, only allows for them by making life, and the mistake, finite in its occurrence.
Earth has the potential for the actuality of perfection, by simply realizing that the creation of consciousness transpired to complete the trilogy of essence and soul that comprise the whole Being.
This is what was meant by "Humans were created in God's own image."

Though the danger of abuse of knowledge was foretold long ago, we are only now beginning to be acutely aware of what such abuse can cause.
It is not just to enhance our own lives that we must use our free will, for to ignore our common soul is to put in peril the recurrence of essence, without which there can be no consciousness of existence. Simply put, we will cease to exist, because we need the essences of all life emanating from our common soul just as immediately as the next breath we take.
The words "Whatsoever you do unto others, you do unto me!" cleave to their true meaning when one realizes it is the soul and essence of life they refer to.

I do not have time for any religion, or the manipulations of truth they have adulterated into feeding their needs, while starving the lives they pretend to "serve".
I only know the truths of existence, that have been realized by others long past, are real, and need little interpretation to be understood by all humankind. I have faith this is possible through free will, but my hopes are not high

@bsfree,

I agree.

Every process in the universe, or multiverse, mimics a larger process. Evolution doesn't merely take place in what we refer to as "species," but in all categories in which Aristotle would include in the term. Thoughts, emotions, and goals of entire civilizations evolve, and cycles have been known to repeat themselves throughout history.

The processes may infinitely regress, thus allowing for infinity and finitude to coexist.

@hue-man,

Does "becoming" coming into existence really take precedence over "being" essence?
Any good process philosopher will tell you yes. Process is primary, being is secondary.

@prothero,

prothero;126873 wrote:

Does "becoming" coming into existence really take precedence over "being" essence?
Any good process philosopher will tell you yes. Process is primary, being is secondary.

Very true, the journey is much more important than the destination itself.
Creation is a continuous process that is currently ongoing.

@housby,

housby;126585 wrote:

Time for you two to get a room???

---------- Post added 02-10-2010 at 08:47 PM ----------

MMP2506;126876 wrote:

Very true, the journey is much more important than the destination itself.
Creation is a continuous process that is currently ongoing.

The form of things change, but there is no creation, as such, one thing creating another...

@Fido,

Fido;126886 wrote:

Time for you two to get a room???

---------- Post added 02-10-2010 at 08:47 PM ----------

The form of things change, but there is no creation, as such, one thing creating another...

Well in terms of evolution, I would say it includes the creation of forms. Matter or energy may or may not be created depending on your beliefs in the laws of physics. Unless you ascribe atemporality to the forms, which is possible. In that sense, forms are actualized during evolution and not necessarily created.

@Fido,

Fido;126886 wrote:

The form of things change, but there is no creation, as such, one thing creating another...

For a process philosopher, the universe is created anew literally continously.
Reality consists of moments or droplets of experience. Each moment of experience perishes, a new moment of experience is born, incorporating elements of the past and possiblities from the future. Being is an illusion created by the incorporation of elements of the past into the present moment. Flux, change and process are the true nature of fundamental reality. So existence, creation, becoming, experience really does preceed and take precedence over essence or being. Mental experience and material essence are the same phenomena experience in different forms.

@prothero,

prothero;126913 wrote:

For a process philosopher, the universe is created anew literally continously.
Reality consists of moments or droplets of experience. Each moment of experience perishes, a new moment of experience is born, incorporating elements of the past and possiblities from the future. Being is an illusion created by the incorporation of elements of the past into the present moment. Flux, change and process are the true nature of fundamental reality. So existence, creation, becoming, experience really does preceed and take precedence over essence or being. Mental experience and material essence are the same phenomena experience in different forms.

I like this post, and generally agree. I might differ with you on the use of the word "illusion." As a metaphor, it's good. Taken too seriously, and we seem to simply invert the being/becoming dichotomy, and reify becoming. But then our very language might be to blame here.

@prothero,

prothero;126913 wrote:

For a process philosopher, the universe is created anew literally continously.
Reality consists of moments or droplets of experience. Each moment of experience perishes, a new moment of experience is born, incorporating elements of the past and possiblities from the future. Being is an illusion created by the incorporation of elements of the past into the present moment. Flux, change and process are the true nature of fundamental reality. So existence, creation, becoming, experience really does preceed and take precedence over essence or being. Mental experience and material essence are the same phenomena experience in different forms.

If mental experience and material essence are indeed the same phenomena, then how can existence take precedence over essence?

@MMP2506,

MMP2506;127241 wrote:

If mental experience and material essence are indeed the same phenomena, then how can existence take precedence over essence?

Essence is our mental experience of the real...

@Fido,

Fido;127420 wrote:

Essence is our mental experience of the real...

I couldn't agree more with that statement. However, I find it paradoxical to claim that something can take precedence over something else, when the two are one in the same.

If essence is our mental experience, then how does that experience precede the essence?

Being/Essence=Existence
therefore it cannot be the case that Existence precedes Being. Maybe they precede each other, but how can one take sole precedence over the other?

I understand you mean our experience, but isn't our experience our existence as well?

@MMP2506,

MMP2506;127488 wrote:

I couldn't agree more with that statement. However, I find it paradoxical to claim that something can take precedence over something else, when the two are one in the same.

If essence is our mental experience, then how does that experience precede the essence?

Being/Essence=Existence
therefore it cannot be the case that Existence precedes Being. Maybe they precede each other, but how can one take sole precedence over the other?

I understand you mean our experience, but isn't our experience our existence as well?

We do not grasp our existence in any form other than essense... You do not know yourself, but through your essence, your essential self, your self perception, which tends to exclude all that is not essential to your being...

@MMP2506,

Difficult to fully or adequately express in language and foreign to traditional western thought:

In Western philosophy being (essence, substance and properties) has always trumped becoming (mind, experience and perception). In Eastern philosophy perception and mind have always played a larger role in the view of reality. For a process philosopher it is process or becoming (a form of experience) which is primary reality not being or substance. Being (substance, essence, properties) can not (does not) exist independently from process. Process however is perceived not only as matter (substance or essence) but also as experience or mind. Process (becoming) is primary reality (not being) hence the term process philosophy.

[QUOTE=MMP2506;127488] I couldn't agree more with that statement. However, I find it paradoxical to claim that something can take precedence over something else, when the two are one in the same. [/QUOTE] The two are different manifestations of the one more fundamental reality which is process (becoming, experience, perception). A form of neutral monism (a correction of both materialism and dualism).

[QUOTE=MMP2506;127488] If essence is our mental experience, then how does that experience precede the essence? [/QUOTE] Essence is one of the perceived properties of mental experience.

[QUOTE=MMP2506;127488] Being/Essence=Existence
therefore it cannot be the case that Existence precedes Being. Maybe they precede each other, but how can one take sole precedence over the other? [/QUOTE] Mind exists, matter exists but they both exist as a form of process as a form of experience. In these views "matter" also is both perceiving and experiencing not in human terms but in its own manner.

[QUOTE=MMP2506;127488] I understand you mean our experience, but isn't our experience our existence as well? [/QUOTE] To experience (a form of process) is to exist. To lack experience (to fail to continuously become) is to fail to continue to exist. Essence requires existence, existence requres process.

@hue-man,

hue-man;84514 wrote:

The defining tenant of existentialism is the belief that existence, the being of a person, precedes the essence or nature of a person. In other words, there is no human nature. This sounds like the blank slate interpretation of human nature.

Is this proposition really true; can it be verified; or is this just another attempt to escape the firm clutches of determinism?

Seems this statemen totally disregards even the most basics of psycology.

@hue-man,

I am going to clear this up right now. It is obvious that essence and existence play leapfrog with one another. Sometime one is ahead, and sometimes the other is ahead.

O.K.?

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;127906 wrote:

I am going to clear this up right now. It is obvious that essence and existence play leapfrog with one another. Sometime one is ahead, and sometimes the other is ahead.

O.K.?

East of the moon, west of the sun ..specifics, without being specific you are destined for politics my friend! Very Happy

@prothero,

prothero;127738 wrote:

To experience (a form of process) is to exist. To lack experience (to fail to continuously become) is to fail to continue to exist. Essence requires existence, existence requres process. [/COLOR]

But what would our existence be without essence? It wouldn't be a human existence. Part of the human essence is the ability to reason, so if the existence first existed without an essence, then at some point, we would not be human. If one can accept this fact, then I can accept existence as being a prerequisite for essence.

The problem I am trying to address I guess, is when does a human become a human, or is it a right given at birth?

Philosophy Forum

Does existence really precede essence?

Quick Links

My Account

able2know