Being To The World


The natural conclusion of a theoretical approach to what it is that we live comes around the moment we leave theory. So while prologic covers the uncertain space between scientific knowledge and insightful understanding, the being-to-the-world concept stands between general biography and actual eveniences.

What ‘being-to-the-world’ hints to?

Let’s consider it as a three-faceted whole. It embodies the entire collection of actual A|D|R occurrences in life’s history. An arise|decide|relate occurrence is a concrete juncture, or event, in somebody’s existence. Here the three originarian seeds must connect and produce an It is (a world) an I am (a being) and a Like this (a language) .
The A|D|R connection is virtually free to engender no matter what, but what is actually engendered in an event is confined inside a much stricter being-to the-world bond, where the A element actualizes as a [being to the] world of sort, the D element as a distinct, cognizant being [to the world], and the R factor as an expression of the [being] to the [world] triple tie. [top]

What this section is specific about?

So this section is primarily concerned with a general survey of what events actually look like the moment they are lived. The question is, Given general biography’s assumptions, is there a way to follow the stream of life, or at least to make out a real event in prosophical terms (i.e. without deciding from a different viewpoint what ‘happened’)? Bluntly said, Is there a way to ever ‘know’ what happens in a particular event without violating the being-to-the-world linkage that is actually being lived? [top]

Investigating ideas

I see two investigations into the being-to-the-world condition. The first one tries to determine what is it that puts up an idea, rather than offering a concept. For an idea I mean something that gets a significance that ends up being thought of as independent from life’s actual circumstances.
Cultures are full of ideas, of course. No doubt they are useful, even in everyday life, because they come readymade. Ideas are quicker than concepts. The latter have to be somewhat re-evaluated whenever they are employed, while an idea goes on on its own. In a way, it carries around its own built-in being-to-the-world, like a snail its shell.
Ideas come in different sizes and appearances. Small ones usually do good service and no particular damage, if only because being small it’s easier to see their limits. On the contrary, big ones tend to do poor service and big damage, because they obfuscate our being-to-the-world’s overall view.
This has never impeded big ideas and ideals to run the world, because an intelligent mind looks for solutions. Solutions, in a way, are the selfies of a conscious, but not so much self-conscious, mind. Any solution seems better than none.
Life needs answers, sure, but we don’t have to feed them to the point of obesity. A no-solution approach to life’s problems would evidently become a practical nightmare; but it would be a theoretical bounty, if only we’d got the guts to avoid hasty, self-soothing solutions. [top]

A knowledge of concepts

The second investigation concerns concepts. I call a concept a reading of experience that remains conscious of its A|D|R-rooted make. Traditionally, concepts stood on their own, either in the form of essential principles or of necessary effects of the world’s order.
At first, concepts were mainly dealt with as objectities, then they became subjectities, while lately they were re-assessed as mere gestures or symptoms. They have never been considered for what they are, i.e. particular readings of some A|D|R concurrence that need another A|D|R concurrence to be re-read.
The usual approach to the being-to-the-world complexity relies on concepts that are known beforehand and presently employed. It’s knowledge through concepts as opposed to knowledge of concepts. The former is essential for any agreement to be made whatsoever, to pragmatic or moral ends.
The Hobbesian ‘Pacta sunt servanda’ principle, for example, is ultimately based on a pre-ordained, common understanding that has to be acknowledged, at least until a new one is devised and takes its place. This said, a knowledge of concepts is crucial for anybody to become aware of the range of her/his true-to-life awareness. Prosophy’s point is like, You cannot really know your concepts if you do not reach back to the primary source of all conceptualization, the A|D|R triple connection – a triple dependence (because of irreducibility) & independence (because of the roots’ reciprocal transducibility). This is the underpinning of all comprehension. [top]

Evaluating freedom

Do we need a definition of freedom, or is it contradictory to try and define what grants our very liberty to define, at least on a political level? I think we do, because the current concept of freedom is an easy prey, as it has always been, for all sort of ideotics. In fact, anybody can concoct a self-righteous idea of human freedom and find it, obviously, right.
As far as our concept of freedom counts on individual, self-serving A|D|R concretions – a selection of connected objectities, subjectities, and expressions instead of the full range of human A|D|R interrelations – it is undeserving of its deepest meaning. We should not be hindered by our current vision from investigating what A|D|R concretions are founding it and, more important, what else we have tacitly ignored.
In short, a substantial understanding of human freedom, knowledge, rights, and duties alike entails a full exploration of the radical relationships between the basic elements that shape and re-shape our being-to-the-world condition. [top]

A prologue to evenience

So the being-to-the-world concept works as a broad introduction to the scrutiny of evenience. A string of acts or events, an evenience, is always a personal affair, so much so that it is ultimately opaque to prosophical analysis. Only facets, separate aspects, are open to analysis. But what has precisely arisen that has been devised to signify what to whom is radically impossible to clarify.
For example, when somebody listens to our words we assume right away, most of the times, him or her to be the person we know, no more no less. This abstract mask is the effect of a quick round-up we need to complete the event’s structure, but who is really facing us we’ll never know for sure.
Life is structurally labile, evenience is a fleeting connection of acts, and acts are transitory A|D|R patterns, in spite of the energy the intelligentsia in all cultures spends to control them. Prosophy, the sensible study of evenience, will not pretend to know its subject directly. It is crucial to state that prosophy studies descriptions of events, and produces just examples of evaluations.
It follows that the matter of choice for prosophy to explore are the richest descriptions available. Today as before, narrative arts, the best in them – especially in the book, theater, and movie formats – deploy a tremendous insight into human events. Creators are particularly keen to deliver the fullest, subtlest, and most wholesome proof of the crushing powers of their art. They try to express the entire world through it.
Thus, they could be excellent trainers of the prosophic attitude toward all being-to-the-world. The reason why Johann Sebastian Bach’s renown is so immense in our world, which couldn’t be more different from his, is the breathtaking width and depth of his search in the realm of instrumental and vocal music, which he saw as a total equivalent of human and divine whole. The perfections of Bach’s works flourish on an unremitting will to express the best and the most of whatever was the case in their themes.
The problem with great expressive and narrative works is that, because of the A|D|R transducibility, they can be re-read at will and, like everything else, reduced to what most pleases the user. So the question is, How can we learn a superior inclusiveness from the extraordinary richness of human insight into the being-to-the-world complexities, an all-embracing understanding of our originarian condition, and avoid incomprehension? [top]

Available wealth

But the same profusion of vision that makes a work of genius so hailed at is virtually available to everybody on earth. Artists convey it much better than most people do, but what a genius captures lies constantly under our own eyes and gushes down our personal eveniences, an accessible wealth we miss to take advantage of in its entirety. We content ourselves with some random picking up, here and there, as if it were a richness made of gold nuggets, all of them made of the same stuff, good to be spent on any goods. But experience is a mobile mosaic whose value accrues exponentially from how many tesseræ are found in the right place at the right moment.
Thus, the Evenience page comes in three sections, devoted to being-to-the-world recountings excerpted from everyday life, artist’s renderings, and fictional narrations. Of course no description can be true to life and exhaustive with regard to the full extent of A|D|R options available to a human being at any given moment. Posted references should be considered no more than suggestive examples. [top]

Main points…
What ‘being-to-the-world’ hints to?
What this section is specific about?
Investigating ideas.
A knowledge of concepts.
Evaluating freedom
A prologue to evenience
Available wealth
First published, September 28, 2014.

Ban-1-1-PH