I think we have to understand first what the subject is.
What is the subject ?
Are you able, my reader, to conceptualize in a knowing and complete sense, what the subject is ? Can you define it?
Exploring the construct of thinking.
Exploring the construct of thinking.
I think we have to understand first what the subject is.
What is the subject ?
Are you able, my reader, to conceptualize in a knowing and complete sense, what the subject is ? Can you define it?
Sober Companion,Intervention, for Alcohol Addiction Recovery and Drug Addiction Recovery
a personal blog about my thesis
the human condition and reality
You - philosophical, thoughtful, witty. Me - still thinks fart jokes are funny. We should DEFINITELY get together!
"Vintage Christianity"
Socio-political philosophical musings
Your podcast for the apocalypse
that which connects us
Thematic, Methodological and Chronological Literature Review of Indian Visual Culture of Secularism.
Training doctors better and training better doctors | Reflections of a medical educator | Aiming to improve medicine, one blog post at a time
change the world
Let's get the dialogue going
Combat as philosophy of life - Philosophy as only alternative to combat
lyrical little essays
simple, personal, and insightful reflections
Should be
I suppose part of the answer to the subject should concerns whether I am just using language like a tool, and thus keeping the content of philosophy always at arms reach where never conveys its object or encounters that which knows. Or if language is intimately involved with the knowing of the object.
Perhaps the answer reveals or moves toward whether I am wholly invested in Being or only partially. Whether the terms are indeed a part of the subject. Or whether the subject is merely part of language.
For sure language lacks precision when it comes to know and to tell the being
Is it my hand that builds things? Or is it the hammer and nails? Have i actually withdrawn in the building of things and of world ? Into nothing ?
If indeed I and the world have become founded upon nothing, is not that the same as involving everything, since nothing really did nothing except maybe to cause people to react, step back a little, from the world they have made to thus be able to make it again in a different way?
But what if the nothing is actually nothing? What if the world I made is and was indeed nothing? I think then I might have a whole different view upon what language is. And what or how I am invoked with it.
If I indeed am nothing. Then the subject may not merely be another word amongst a world of relative words. It might actually be something. Like the whole world: like being itself?
Honestly? I can’t define it other than the definition given by the classical philosophy: consciousness, master of oneself, free will… Facing the subject is the object, submitted tithe subject
But all this doesn’t convince.
Lol. Is there a subject that does not find itself eternally enmeshed relativity and equivocation ?