[MD] The Examined Life

[Ham Priday]

Hey, Will --


On 10/24/09 7:45 PM "Willblake2" wrote:

> Let's start at the beginning. Negation in my mind is: Not allowed
> to exist (at least in the context I read your posts). Nothingness is
> not allowed and therefore something exists. I would further try to
> understand your ontology, by stating that I read this premise to
> include an active negation. For this activity to be present it requires
> something, such as our bodies, to negate nothingness. Here is
> where I have difficulty, for our bodies to negate, they must exist
> apart from nothingness. If such is the case, negation has already
> occurred before the need to negate. Let me know (or point me
> to your thesis) to better understand this.

Since this appears to be a two-way conversation thus far, I hope to be able 
to clear up your confusion before Horse decides that a discussion of 
Essentialism is self-serving and inappropriate in a forum dedicated to 
Pirsig's MoQ.

"Not allowed to exist" is the wrong connotation for Negation.  In fact, it 
is completely misconstrued.  I don't know how you arrived at that 
conclusion, but here is what I said in my thesis [see 'Creation']:

"For the Essentialist, the predicates 'to be' and 'to ex-ist' are 
derivatives of an "uncreated" Essence whose reality transcends the 
parameters of finite existence.  If Essence is a priori, and existence is 
limited to phenomena that occur in time and space, then it is illogical to 
say that Essence "exists".  Essence is the Absolute Source of finite 
experience, not an existent.

"There is but one plausible hypothesis to account for the creation of a 
dynamic, multiplistic universe from a constant, absolute source: viz., 
Essence is negational.  Because Essence is absolute and ubiquitous, there is 
no other within or beside it.  Therefore, in order to create an other, it 
'invents' one by negation. ...The modus operandi for the creation of an 
otherness is abnegation or 'self-denial', rather than action or movement. 
Like the mountain climber who has ascended to the highest summit and for 
whom further progress can only be descent, Absolute Essence is the only 
entity that creates by 'exclusion'.  The potential for actualizing the 
appearance of contrariety (difference) is innate in its Oneness.  And 
because negation is the potentiality of Essence, which itself is primary, 
the cause and the source of creation are one."

The metaphysics of negation and 'double-negation' has been expounded by 
Hegel who postulated that Being is negated - that is, reflected in an image 
or "recognized" - which implies subjective cognizance of an objective 
"other".  This reflection of Being turns out to be "appearance", but it is 
also "the proximate truth of [Essence]" in the sense that it contains 
Essence in an objective form.  The (inward) negation of Essence is 
manifested in its (outward) appearance, and the completion of this identity 
between inward and outward is Actuality.  Thus, according to Hegel, 
Appearance is the negation of the negation of Being, whereas Actuality is 
the negation of the negation of Essence.

To put it simply, Existence is what Essence is NOT (i.e., appearance, 
otherness, division, change and relation).  These existential attributes are 
the result of a negation ("denial") on the part of Essence, the primary 
affect of which is to differentiate (reduce) sensible awareness from the 
"whole" of Essence.  This establishes a negated "agent" (value-sensibility) 
which constructs its differentiated "reality" from the Value of the Absolute 
Source.  The differentiating process involves a "secondary negation" by the 
negate whereby relational value is reclaimed by the agent, leaving the 
appearance of representational beingness in its place.  Note that the negate 
is a "nothingness" in the existential sense, just as Sensibility is 
nothingness.  However, it is precisely this nothingness which separates, 
delineates and actualizes finite objects as appearances.  (My axiom for this 
hypothesis: Negation by a negate ---> Appearance of an other.)

Please keep in mind that negation is a metaphysical principle, not the work 
of physical "bodies".  The physical aspects of existence are 
intellectualized following the experience (actualization) of particular 
"others".  I realize this is an unconventional theory that you won't find 
supported anywhere but in the existential ontologies of Hegel, Heidegger, 
and Sartre.  (This makes my mission even more difficult because Essentialism 
refutes the notion that 'Being' is the true reality.  But one must give 
credit where credit is due.)

I do hope this ontological primer hasn't added to your confusion, Will.  And 
I'll be happy to explain this concept in more detail or answer your specific 
questions off-line, if you prefer.

Meanwhile, thanks for your patience and understanding.

Essentially yours,
Ham