A philosophical essay i am writing

[Kyriakos]

I started writing my first philosophical treatise yesterday night, after almost a decade of not occupying myself with purely philosophical works (i have a degree in Philosophy, but mostly write/think about literature).

Its topic (or at least that of the first chapter) is the relation between the notions of the external and the internal world.

Generally my starting point is that each person can be seen as an atom in the external world, but also that each Ego can be seen as an atom in the internal world. Thus there is a parallelism between the two.

Also there is the idea of space, which creates this characterization, and that idea too is argued to be both one that is found in the external, but also in the internal world: space is formed as a notion in part from the person's reaction to his eyesight and ability to move in a three dimensional space. Thus it is an anthropomorphic notion. But at the same time space is seemingly something that belongs to the external world, since its understanding makes the phenomenon of existing in an external world possible.

Furthermore there is the idea of speech, which is argued to be another parallel of the idea of moving in space, this time moving in thoughtful interaction with others. Speech gives us the ability to come into contact with other people in the mental plane, like having a physical body and the ability to move gives us the capacity to interact with others in the physical plane. Also speech is to be seen as a phenomenon which influenced the further development of Logos (thinking) while the appearance of Logos predates speech in human history and development.

Anyway, these are some of the points of the first chapter. I am currently at the third part of it (wrote almost 8 pages last night). I think that i would like to expand the treatise to at least 1000 pages, which is roughly how much i write in my diary in a full year, but this can be written a lot faster if i am consistent in creating it.

I would be very interested in reading your impressions of this general presentation of my study. You can comment on its topic, its specific characterization in this thread, or anything else that relates to it. I hope this can expand into a meaningful discussion, and, as Heidegger once wrote: "by discussing it becomes obvious what the original idea was about"

[Kyriakos]

Anyone?

[The Atheist]

I don't think you've said anything specific enough to really discuss just yet. The brief idea you've put forward is neither controversial nor unconventional.

What part did you want to discuss?

[Kyriakos]

Well something which aims to be true has neither to aspire to be controversial nor unconventional

Any part of the OP can be discussed. For example how about the tripartite nature of Space?

1)The idea of space is the essence of the significance of the term "space" which is formed inside one's mental world.

2) The experience of space is the natural and (usually) direct realization of space through one's physical ability to move, granted by his body.

3) Space itself, as a thing by itself, is something at the same time different from the idea of space, but also different due to its position, being outside of the thinker/observer of it. It has no form, since it assumes forms dependent on the observer.

[G L Wilson]

Man is a part of space, space invades him. Look at the Catholic mass, identity in the Host is completely buggered by atomic theory. To say that man is not substantial is not saying very much but it is the truth. Man is mortal, the atoms of his soul scatter upon death. (Lucretius is worth a look in this respect.) Life is a miracle, the only one that we have. It can be explained but not fully.

[Panglossian]

I think that i would like to expand the treatise to at least 1000 pages,

A 1000 pages - that's the recipe for philosophical nausea Unless it's utter genius no-one is ever going to read it. Nietzsche had the best motto for philosophers: It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what other men say in whole books, what other men do not say in whole books.

[Kyriakos]

A 1000 pages - that's the recipe for philosophical nausea Unless it's utter genius no-one is ever going to read it. Nietzsche had the best motto for philosophers: It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what other men say in whole books, what other men do not say in whole books.

You are correct, i do not really expect it to be read, and Nietzsche himself, despite this motto, was known to claim that "i am not being read, i will not be read" as well

But 1000 pages is not much for such a subject. Surely others have accomplished such a thing, and i do have a lot to write about since this issue is vast.

[Panglossian]

You are correct, i do not really expect it to be read, and Nietzsche himself, despite this motto, was known to claim that "i am not being read, i will not be read" as well

But 1000 pages is not much for such a subject. Surely others have accomplished such a thing, and i do have a lot to write about since this issue is vast.

You're right. If you can, you should. Maybe I'm envious . All I can muster philosophically is a handful of aphorisms here and there.

[Kyriakos]

Well i studied it, not that i got that far, but i have the habit of analyzing and synthesizing thoughts

Also this work would help me form a more stable view of these issues myself.

[G L Wilson]

Well i studied it, not that i got that far, but i have the habit of analyzing and synthesizing thoughts

Also this work would help me form a more stable view of these issues myself.

How can anything be stable over 1000 pages?

[Kyriakos]

Exactly "Everything flows", so the last pages will have been the arrival at a new theory, only buried in the beginning under the rabble of not yet realized deeper urges to arrive at such an end

And yes, it would be 1000 pages styled after the last sentence, so generally unreadable by others i am afraid...

[G L Wilson]

Exactly "Everything flows", so the last pages will have been the arrival at a new theory, only buried in the beginning under the rabble of not yet realized deeper urges to arrive at such an end

And yes, it would be 1000 pages styled after the last sentence, so generally unreadable by others i am afraid...

Then why not start with the last sentence and end there?

[Kyriakos]

For the same reason that maths did not start with current maths. Ancient maths were useful too as a foundation, and usually are even more established than anything current, however breakthroughs in the present find their way into the field and are being taught in schools alongside ancient knowledge.

In other words: i would start with the last sentence, if it was not needed for me to unlock it by writing all that is before it.

[G L Wilson]

For the same reason that maths did not start with current maths. Ancient maths were useful too as a foundation, and usually are even more established than anything current, however breakthroughs in the present find their way into the field and are being taught in schools alongside ancient knowledge.

In other words: i would start with the last sentence, if it was not needed for me to unlock it by writing all that is before it.

Once you have unlocked it, why not start with it like Descartes?

[Kyriakos]

Is not the journey to Ithaca significant by itself though? Surely arriving there is the end, but the actual journey has its own significance, and, after all, it was the journey which was the subject of the epic, not Odysseus' life when he finally dealt with the situation in his kingdom.