Yes, I know. I have just bombarded you with some of the most abstract and confusing terms in the study of philosophy. Please bear with me and/or follow with me if you are academically so inclined. From a philosophical perspective, the distinctions to be made here are important.
Let me say something quickly about words and meaning here first.
..............................................................................
All words are defined, first and foremost, by their personal author. This is the 'narcissistic' meaning of a word.
All words are defined, secondly, within a social context and/or a range of different social, cultural, and/or sub-cultural contexts, with more generalized, socially shared meanings, applicable to each and every one of these similar and/or different social contexts. This is the social meaning of a word, of which there are quite likely to be a myriad of self-social disagreements -- and based on this -- self-social misunderstandings.
Thus, all words have both a 'narcissistic (self-centered, self-functional) meaning' as well as a more generalized, socially accepted and/or disagreed upon meaning -- the latter of which can present a myriad of opportunities for social misunderstanding.
............................................................................................
The following list of 'definitions' and/or 'descriptions' of the meaning of the main philosophical words listed in the title of this essay can thus be described as my own 'narcissistic' understandings of the meaning of these words which may or may not fit very well with their 'more traditional definitions and descriptions' which you can look up on the internet and/or in a standard philosophy book.
The reason for my writing this essay is that I have found there to be two main -- and quite different -- understandings of the philosophical term 'ontology'. The first of these understandings tends to be much more 'metaphysical' in its nature asking such questions as the 'brain-teasing' question: 'What is existence'?
The second of these understandings -- which is the avenue that I generally tend to prefer to explore -- is more 'phenomenological' and 'existential' in nature and revolves around such questions as: 'How are you choosing to be in the world right now'? Are you a thinker or a feeler or a doer? Is your thinking, feeling, and doing all wholistically connected? Or do you feel that your thinking is disconnected from either your feeling and/or your doing? And if so, what is the nature of this 'disconnection' or 'dissociation' or 'alienated' of thinking, feeling, and/or doing?
The first avenue of investigation tends to ask very, very abstract questions that revolve around mainly 'invisible, metaphysical questions, assumptions, and theoretical propositions'?
The second avenue of investigation tends to be much more concretely aimed at capturing the 'phenomenological' and 'existential' details about how we choose to live our life each and every minute of our life, or at one particular 'moment' of our life, and/or in a 'series of moments' of our life which might be viewed as a 'small but perhaps enlightening cross-section' of our life. This is what a Gestalt therapist will do with you in a Gestalt Therapy session.
The first avenue of investigation revolves around a very abstract discussion of 'existence', 'being', 'becoming', 'universals', 'particulars', all of which comprise the basic subject matter of 'ontology'.
The second avenue of investigation explores a much more personal, intimate discussion of 'our own personal choice -- and myriad of sub-choices -- that comprise our own 'existence' or 'ontology'.
I will use the terms 'metaphysical ontology' vs. 'existential ontology' to differentiate the two different avenues of philosophical and/or psychological investigation that I hope I have clarified here.
In earlier and/or later discussions about Hegel and how Hegel has influenced the subject of 'evolution', we thus need to differentiate between how Hegel influenced the study of: 1. the 'evolution of human consciousness' (i.e., the study of the evolution of awareness and/or self-awareness; 2. the study of the 'evolution of human epistemology' (i.e., the study of knowledge); and/or 3. the study of the 'evolution of life' itself and/or the 'evolution of human life', the latter of which we might also call the study of the 'evolution of existential ontology' as opposed to the study of 'the evolution of metaphysical and/or epistemological ontology' (which was mentioned above and which relates to such abstract questions as: 'What is existence?'
I hope I have created more philosophical clarification here than confusion.
-- dgb, Oct. 15th, 2009.
-- David Gordon Bain
...............................................................................
Ontology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please improve this article if you can. (May 2009)
This article is about ontology in philosophy. For the concept in information science, see ontology (information science).
Parmenides was among the first to propose an ontological characterization of the fundamental nature of reality.
Ontology (from the Greek ὄν, genitive ὄντος: of being (neuter participle of εἶναι: to be) and -λογία, -logia: science, study, theory) is the philosophical study of the nature of being, existence or reality in general, as well as of the basic categories of being and their relations. Traditionally listed as a part of the major branch of philosophy known as metaphysics, ontology deals with questions concerning what entities exist or can be said to exist, and how such entities can be grouped, related within a hierarchy, and subdivided according to similarities and differences.
Contents [hide]
1 Overview
1.1 Some fundamental questions
1.2 Concepts
2 History of ontology
2.1 Etymology
2.2 Origins
2.2.1 Parmenides and Monism
2.2.2 Ontological pluralism
2.2.3 Plato
2.2.4 Aristotle
3 Other ontological topics
3.1 Ontological and epistemological certainty
3.2 Body and environment
4 Prominent ontologists
5 See also
6 References
7 External links
Overview
Students of the Greek philosopher Aristotle (384 BC – 322 BC) first used the word 'metaphysica' (literally "after the physical") to refer to what their teacher described as "the science of being qua being" - later known as ontology. 'Qua' means 'in the capacity of'. Hence, ontology is inquiry into being in so much as it is being, or into being in general, beyond any particular thing which is or exists; and the study of beings insofar as they exist, and not insofar as, for instance, particular facts obtained about them or particular properties relating to them. More specifically, ontology concerns determining whether some categories of being are fundamental, and asks in what sense the items in those categories can be said to "be".
Some philosophers, notably of the Platonic school, contend that all nouns (including abstract nouns) refer to existent entities. Other philosophers contend that nouns do not always name entities, but that some provide a kind of shorthand for reference to a collection of either objects or events. In this latter view, mind, instead of referring to an entity, refers to a collection of mental events experienced by a person; society refers to a collection of persons with some shared characteristics, and geometry refers to a collection of a specific kind of intellectual activity.[1] Between these poles of realism and nominalism, there are also a variety of other positions; but any ontology must give an account of which words refer to entities, which do not, why, and what categories result. When one applies this process to nouns such as electrons, energy, contract, happiness, space, time, truth, causality, and God, ontology becomes fundamental to many branches of philosophy.
Some fundamental questions
The principal questions of ontology are "What can be said to exist?" and "Into what categories, if any, can we sort existing things?" Various philosophers have provided different answers to these questions.
One common approach is to divide the extant entities into groups called categories. Of course, such lists of categories differ widely from one another, and it is through the co-ordination of different categorial schemes that ontology relates to such fields as library science and artificial intelligence.
Further examples of ontological questions include:
What is existence?
Is existence a property?
Which entities, if any, are fundamental?
How do the properties of an object relate to the object itself?
What features are the essential, as opposed to merely accidental, attributes of a given object?
How many levels of existence or ontological levels are there?
What is a physical object?
Can one give an account of what it means to say that a physical object exists?
Can one give an account of what it means to say that a non-physical entity exists?
What constitutes the identity of an object?
When does an object go out of existence, as opposed to merely changing?
Concepts
Quintessential ontological concepts include:
Universals and Particulars
Substance and Accident
Abstract and Concrete objects
Essence and Existence
Determinism and Indeterminism
