Skip navigation

The basic issue of ontology can be stated in terms of reach. “How far does my being reach?”

Kid’s play of competing who can reach a taller signpost by jumping is an example of the attitude (without, maybe, the wordiness). To reach means that there your being can go. It might not go, by choice or accident, it might be there only very slightly, but it is possible.

Or, to state it negatively, the being cannot extend itself where it cannot reach. What one cannot reach is beyond one’s existence: it does not exist for it. So, we can come with those definitions:

all that might be, or more precisely all that is, of which only a part is reachable.
all that is, or more precisely all that my being can reach, or all the places where i can be.
all that my will reaches, or more precisely all that is directly subjected to my will.

The reaching action will progressively redefine it’s own set of possibilities, in the same sense that the “third dimension” expanded the possibilities of Cartesian Coordinates. From the naive idea of reaching as touching to reaching as seeing to reaching as knowing to reaching as proposing.

It now becomes clear how epistemology derives from ontology.

This progression also describes the evolution towards abstraction of complex beings.


One Comment

  1. What is the defining threshold for something to have the property of ‘unable to be reached by man’?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: