| Summary: | It, what exists, so to say, demands for the addressee – the thing exists in the face of (for) something (or somebody). In other words, the existence is the relation. The competitive conception of the existence outside the relation (existence isolated) leads to the contradiction. The existential proposition ‘Some A exists’, understoodliterally, is the pleonasm. It tends to treat the existential proposition as the conventional figure, expressing the simple act of an A affirmation (the exclamation ‘A!’). The existence’s relation should not be narrowed down only to the relation of perception(esse est percipi). It is needed to be understood widely, as every relation, in which something influences on whatever (that is, some change occurs). This influence (change) can take place both inside or outside the consciousness. The existing thing, the influence exerted by it, and the change, occurred as the result of this influence, are identical. Thanks to it, we can eliminate difficulties connected withfinding ‘the point of contact’ between modules of the existence’s relation (that is, ‘the place’ where existing thing and its addressee are connected). The existence, as the relation of influence-change, is modal and gradual (as regards both intensity and extensiveness): the thing, in different aspects, can exist more or less. Theoretically, discussed relation can be symmetrical or antisymmetrical. The concept of error should be redefined. The error concerning the existence (resp. the nonexistence) of specified thing, must not mean the incompatibility between this thing and the perception (widely: between this thing and the change causedby this thing in its addressee). The existence is the unity of the thing-perception (resp. the thing-influence-change). That is why the incompatibility can occur only between the state of thing-perception (resp. the thing-influence-change) and the related state of duty. The conception of the existence as the relation of influencechangeallows to overcome the contrast between so-called the external world and the internal world. The bond created in the existence’s relation is the exact connection, in which two modules somewhat fuse mutually in the transcendent-immanent bi-unity. The existing thing is present inside its addressee, as the stir (the change), and the addressee leaves itself to the externality of the thing. Therefore some divisions lose its significance: objectivity and subjectivity, onticity and epistemicity. Traditional philosophical attitudes, realistic and idealistic, appear as one-sided, and the conflictbetween them, at least partially, as apparent.
|
|---|