Oct 22 2008
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”)?