Oct 22 2008

Philosophical Rumination of the Day

Published by at 2:57 pm under nature photos,philosophy

We can’t see complete darkness. Complete darkness is not seeing anything. Not seeing.

So the expression, “Man, it was complete darkness,” is not fully accurate. “Man, I experienced complete darkness,” is usually closer to the mark.

Alright, much of philosophizing smacks of linguistic gymnastics, the cleaving and teasing from words new meanings.

I once attempted to read Jean Paul Sartre’s Being and Nothingness. I slogged through 60 pages before giving up. I thought, “Man, 500 pages on nothingness. I’m glad he didn’t try to write about somethingness.”

In the case of complete darkness we are talking not about the being of a nothingness, but of the lack of something, namely light. Can the lack of something have being (i.e., “it was”)?

Be the first to comment

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply


three × = 9