Tuesday, November 13, 2007

Summary and Disclaimer (form, part 7)

In the previous essays I have used many words. Lest some be misunderstood I will clarify some things now.

First of all, in case it is not obvious from these previous essays, the idea of "form" being used here has nothing to do with "essences" in the Platonic or Phenomenological senses. Rather, this designation has been chosen in light of its common usage as regards artistic and especially musical practices. This will be the subject of the forthcoming section of which the previous section serves as an adjacent land.

What I have been discussing here is not concerned so much with ontological arguments of proofs or refutations of this existence of independent entities. One needn't simultaneously assert the existence of some idea or object (thereby putting it to use) and simultaneously be troubled as to whether the thing being used exists. Or rather, that too is an interesting approach, but is not the approach of these essays.

This discussion is concerned with the fallacy created by attempting to refute the formal existence or structural attributes of propositions and material objects stated to exist or expressed in utility. The falsifiability of such a proposition, and especially a material substance is paradoxical, and while entertaining it is otherwise useless. It is a partial description of a void in a made up language that violates its own grammatical rules.

As such, while phychology is also very interesting, the chemical processes, emotional correlates, and behavioral manifestations of the individual mind are not the subject of this discussion. I want to talk about action in light of forms the actor believes to exist.

Nor is the subject at hand Intentionality, even though I am discussing ideas.

Nor have we need to bring up whether or not ontology or epistemology is being placed first in the chain of analysis. That is another game, and besides for the purposes here they are quite linked, embedded in one another even. Here we are concerned with use, not even value (so ethics aren't really relevant either).

Furthermore, certainty is not the issue. We are dealing with material as such. It is said to exist, it is used, and thus its existence is demonstrate-able. The question is: can something which exists be deprived of form or or structure?

No comments: