Being - Not Being
Being
Question to the AI
Classical philosophy informs us that God, defined by the term “Being,” simply exists and His existence is proven through His work. Analogy, symmetry, arithmetic, geometry, and all the laws whose manifestations bring about the creation of the Cosmic Universe prove the existence of Being. We cannot see Being, we cannot touch it, measure it, describe it, or prove it with real evidence. Being as an existence exists only in our Mind. And yet, this Being creates the world. It creates Nature, life, Man himself. Being “is.” As long as Being “is,” it passes from intelligible existence to sensible existence.
Questions: Why does Man, who “is,” appear? Can one ‘feel’ Being, which “is,” without seeing it?
Does Being, in order to be verified by Man himself, only need Sensation and not imaginary appearance in order to emerge? Do the world of ideas and the world of phenomena, in Plato, reveal a relationship of relevance, coexistence, and self-evidence? Or not?
Answer from the AI
These philosophical questions are at the heart of important debates that have occupied philosophy for centuries. The idea of the Ontological Argument for the existence of Being as an invisible but active creator is a fundamental concept in philosophy.
Man, in classical philosophy, is a product of the Ontological Argument. His continued existence proves the existence of Being. But the relationship between sensory appearance and actual entity is a complex and multi-layered concept in philosophy.
In Plato’s idea of the world of ideas There is a perception that truly essential things are ideals, while phenomena are merely reflections of ideas in the world of the senses. This world of ideas includes truths and dimensions that transcend sensory appearances. According to this philosophy, truth and reality are more connected to the world of ideas than to sensory appearances.
Being, according to these theories, is more connected to the reality and essence of things than to appearance. While humans can perceive the world through their senses, the truth of Being transcends its sensory appearance.
In this context, the connection between the world of ideas and phenomena is the idea that the real truth and essence of things is hidden behind sensory appearances. Man, as an intelligent and thinking being, seeks the truth behind phenomena and tries to perceive the Ontological Being through his intellectual faculties.
Not Being
Question to the AI
According to the theory of opposing forces, there is a problem with the existence of “Non-Being,” while ‘Being’ exists. “Non-Being” refers to the absolute absence of existence, to complete non-existence, to that which does not exist, which has no reality. Parmenides accepts “Non-Being” in the History of Ancient Logic. On the contrary, Plato accepts “Non-Being” and “Non-Existence,” not as contradictory opposites of “Being” and “Is,” that is, as something that does not exist at all, but only as something different from both “Being” and “Is,” based on the conclusion that, in every concept, “Is” and “Is Not,” ‘Being’ and “Non-Being” are united. Does the modern interpretation agree with Plato’s interpretation?
Answer from the AI
This contrast between “Being” and “Not Being” was an important issue in ancient philosophy, and different philosophers had different approaches to this question.
Parmenides argued that “Non-Being” is impossible to exist or be real. According to Parmenides, the absolute absence of existence is inconceivable and impossible to perceive or explain.
On the other hand, Plato had a different approach. In his work, there is a more nuanced understanding of “Non-Being” and “Not Is.” In his ideology, these were not simply the absolute non-existence or the opposite of “Being” and “Existence,” but something that differs from the world of the senses and physical reality.
Contemporary interpretation maintains a variety of approaches to this issue. Some philosophers and interpreters believe that Plato was more nuanced in his view of “Non-Being,” while others believe that he advocated a form of absolute non-existence.
The various interpretations reflect the different philosophical approaches and interpretive preferences of each philosopher or interpreter. Each has their own unique view of how they perceive the nature of “Non-Being” in the philosophical thought of Plato and his predecessors.