Philosophical Dialogues  XXI

Essence and Existence XXI        

3rd December, 1999

By Franz J. T. Lee 

Einai, about Intellect  a n d  Reason

SCENE:   Philosophy Seminar

(Coseino introduces the Concepts, Acting, Act, Praxis, Thinking, Thought and Theory. Then he opens the floor with the discussion about Einai, about Intellect  a n d  Reason.)

Coseino: At the week-end, with some of our students, I had given a most interesting open-door class in the Zoological Gardens. I am sure that all of you are already informed about the discussion.

A question very often asked is: What Is To Be Done?  Also, always, many of us do not realize that when we ask this question, that it is a result of  doing  a n d  thinking already. Only active  a n d  thinking "human beings  a n d  existences" can ask such a question at all. Others do not even know what they are doing, or whether they ever did anything in their lives at all. Generally, after they have secured some education, got a job, have an apartment, got married, have enough children, then, they are "bored" to death. Today, you have to activate your mind again, and please do not fall asleep, as a result of "boredom"! Einai exists complex, complicated!

Among other things, there are three major ways in which we can do something  a n d  think about something.

Firstly, we simply do the thing. And in our sense, the slogan : "Do It Yourself !" is very appropriate here. This implies that our Cosmic Being (generally known as our body) acts; and being a cosmic being, it is Cosmos itself which acts. We are natural, and naturally we act. What is Cosmos ? Precisely this is Cosmos! This is Praxis.

Secondly, we exist, therefore we are conscious, and as result of this, we think about our cosmic being, about our body, about our acts; we, as Einai-In-Itself, think about our essential acts, about Cosmos acting, about Cosmos itself, about our corporeal acts. Contrary to Plato’s Vision, which is purely passive and receptive, we actively exist consciously a n d we thoughtfully perceive our Action. This is the content of our Percept. As such Theory exists! As such we understand : Think it Yourself !

Indira: How are these related to our Science  a n d  Philosophy?

Coseino: We are scientific: We act in Cosmos and Cosmos acts in Us, a n d , We think about our scientific Acts a n d We consciously act scientifically. We are natural, we are being intellectual, We praxis (practice) Natural Science. How does Einai-In-Itself exist? As such Einai-In-Itself exists, as Natural Science, as Intellect.

In the Patria, Einai-In-Itself exists perverted; its a n d -Relation has been reduced to a simple /a n d -Relation. For this reason, the Patrian  /a n d - Relation, that is,  Labour in general, and Intellectual Labour in particular, have become Private Property, Commodities on the Global Market.

Albert: Do these considerations also refer to our Theory and Philosophy?

Coseino: Yes! We theorize, We philosophize, We socialize !!!

Thirdly, we do not only think about acts and actions, we are not only scientific, we also theorize, we philosophize, we socialize, we reason. We think intellectually  a n d  rationally. Rationally we question our own thinking, our ideas and our thoughts, we transcend them, we renovate and surpass them – we "hack" and "crack" the "absolute truths", we insert our own "serial numbers", our Percepts  a n d  Concepts AND Transcepts. We design our own Method, we rationally transcend our very "Home Page".

Indira: Are our various postulates, contrapostulates and juxtapostulates "absolute truths"? Are our arguments also formal-logical and dialectical?

 Coseino: Nothing that we expound here is absolute, exists as an absolute truth; within its specific context, methodologically, on a certain level, some statement can be "true", in another context, on another degree, it could be "false", and on another mension, it would be "neither true, nor false". This is what we understand by " thinking about thinking", by thinking about thought, by Reason  a n d  Reasoning, by Einai-For-Itself. In this sense, we are formal-logical, we exist dialectical, but we reason far beyond these realms; we uni-, dia- , tria- and zil-logize, we excel, we transcend all "absolute truths". But to excel an "absolute truth", we must first identify it, affirm it, only then we can negate and superate it. This, Reason as "Intellect  a n d  Reason", as "Natural Science  a n d  Social Philosophy" performs. In this way, Einai-For-Itself, Reason, exists as a Gegensatz, as Intellect  a n d Reason, as Science  a n d  Philosophy. In brief, we affirm "absolute truths", we negate "relative truths"; but, we also superate, transcend, excel them.

Mahatma, you surely have studied the paper which I distributed to the class last week. To what is Einai related, what does it concern?

Mahatma: Poor me! Here We Go!

As we have concluded previously, we can act, and we can express these acts in words, tones, symbols, gestures or language. This is Cosmic Action.

Alfred: Yes, but, we can also think; we can think about cosmic acts, for example, about a rainbow; we can think about our physical, cosmic acts, for example, caressing our beloved one; we can think about the rainbow and the beloved caress. This exists as Thinking about Cosmos, as Intellect.

Patricia: Alfred, as you have indicated, we can think about Thinking a n d Thought itself; for example, about the Rain-Bow Beauty of our Love Relation, about "holy angels" a n d "wicked devils", about "democracy" a n d "human rights".

Mahatma: I am not quite so sure about the "Rain-Bow Beauty" of our Relationship. To me it seems more like an "Erupting Volcano".

Patricia: At any event, a conditio sine qua non for any level  a n d  degree of Thinking is to be able to identify intellectually with incisive-decisive precision about what we are thinking. What is the debate about, around what the discussion unfolds itself? The topic could be "An Erupting Volcano", "The Thing-In-Itself" or "Neither God, nor Nothing". Firstly, all these themes have to be identified, and secondly, we have to grasp their intellectual essence.

Coseino: In other words, we have to be experts in "setzen", in postulating, we have to be logical, methodic thinkers.

All Sätze, Postulates, are in-themselves; they can be simple, compound or vague. In-themselves, they can be composed of Sätze (Postulates) and/or Gegensätze (Counterpostulates) and/or Entgegensätze (Juxtapostulates). No matter how many component parts or units form a Satz, the Sätze among themselves are all indifferent to each other; their only relation is "and", is a non-relation. To grasp our postulates, our Essence has to go into Action, has to go cosmic, not en vogue.

Jeanette: Professor, could you please give us an example?

Coseino: A simple example :

As such, as ingredient units of Cosmos, they are all minimal Sätze-In-Themselves; that is, they are various cosmic Levels , expressed by us as Unigories.

 Now, a more complex example. In a previous lecture, we have postulated :

 Einai.

 As Satz, it can be written as follows:

[Cosmos  and  Einai].

We have illustrated its intensive component parts :

 Cosmos, and, Einai.

 These three minimal Sätze within the Satz Einai are non-related, they have a non-relation, an and-relation, they are indifferent to each other. Now, as Satz, we could write Einai as follows:

 Cosmos and "and" and Einai.

 Hence, Einai is a compound Satz, and as such, it is non-related to anything else; it is not even related to It-Self, to Einai-It-Self. We identified it as Einai-In-Itself.

Indira: Please explain this with a Triagory.

As a Satz, the above is indifferent to itself and to anything else; it is essentially an and-relation, a non-relation.

Now we will illustrate what it is composed of and indicate exactly which units have no relation to each other.

(Coseino goes to the blackboard, and he begins to write, to demonstrate the various elements of the Triagory:  Cosmos  a n d  Einai  AND  Nothing.)

Coseino: Among others, for example, we have the following component units, levels, Sätze :

 Cosmos, a n d , Einai, AND, Nothing;

 Cosmos, and, Cosmos and;

 Cosmos and Einai;

 (Cosmos  a n d  Einai), (Einai AND Nothing);

 Einai-In-Itself, Einai-For-Itself, (Einai-In a n d For-Itself); etc.

Martina: What relation do all these Sätze have to each other?

Coseino: All as Sätze are indifferent to each other, they are only non-related to themselves. It is imperative to note here that every single "Cosmos" or "Einai" mentioned in the above illustrated Sätze has no relation to any other of the same name; none of them are identical.

Albert: Could you give us a simple, concrete example?

Coseino: Albert, Einai is concrete, but it exists abstract. here you have your "concrete" example: hydrogen as an independent gas is not identical to hydrogen in the compound water. The one is highly inflammable, the other extinguishes fire.

Adam: Can a Satz also be a Gegensatz "at the same time"?

Coseino: Yes, Adam. Einai exists "double", as Satz, but also as Gegensatz "at the same time". Hence, note : "Cosmos a n d  Einai" can be either a Satz or a Gegensatz; it depends on what exactly we mean:

As Satz it is a unit, a unigory, a level; as such, it has no relation, neither intensive nor extensive.

As Gegensatz it exists as a diagory, a degree; as such, it has an intensive  a n d  extensive relation, an  a n d-relation.

Karl: How do I think, how do I identify anything? When I identify, which part of my brains, of my Mind, of Einai, do I use?

Indira: Do I understand "correctly", that as Einai-For-Itself, we thus differentiate? And, to differentiate, two opposite entities must exist, so that they can be differentiated at all. And our rational instrument itself, which has to accomplish this task, must be differentiated as the Gegensatz:

 Einai-In-Itself  a n d  Einai-For-Itself.

 Simply: Einai-In- a n d -For-Itself.

 Only as such we reach the maximum degree of Reason, of Intellect a n d Reason.

Bill: Could anybody retrieve for me a historic profile of "Intellect  a n d  Reason" in the Patria?

Coseino: Okay! I will begin and you can continue.

Before we continue with our philosophic exposition of Einai, of Existence, Intellect, Reason and Theory, let us take a glance at the History of Philosophy, to see how some major philosophers have defined the concepts: Sensation, Intellect and Reason. This is important for us, it enables us to identify, differentiate and to negate with precision, in order to illustrate the exact connotations of our Percepts and Concepts.

 Throughout the Middle Ages, until the 17th Century, the ancient Greek "Logos" was ideologized and it became transformed into intellectus (Latin) and into Verstand (German). This concept acquired the connotation : "das höchste Erkenntnisvermögen des Menschen", the highest cognositive potentiality of Man. In this context, we should not forget who "Man" was, and who He still is. Man was and still is masculine and he incorporates and animates everything that serves ruling class interests. In the Dark Ages, he personified European Patrian Divine Essence.

As it is natural in all class societies, everything must be class-ified, hence the major elements of "Thought", of "Denken", of "Human Being" received the following hierarchical structure:

1. Intellectus (Intellect, Verstand)

2. Ratio (Reason, Vernunft)

3. Sensatio (Sensation, Sinneswahrnehmung)

 The above corresponded to the social feudal order and it reflected the absolutist rule by Divine Grace. The eminent mystic Meister Eckhart had translated the Latin concept "intellectus" as "verstand" or "verstendigkeit", then it was "updated" to "Verstand"; later, in English, this holy summum bonum will be baptized as Intellect or Understanding. Next in line, after this supra-divine concept, came "ratio", which Meister Eckhart, but also Luther, had translated as "firnunft", thereafter, it was modernized as "Vernunft", as Reason. This was considered to be the minor organ of Thinking of sapient Human Being.

In descending order, finally, we encounter "Sensatio", Sensation, crypto-thinking, which is generally associated with the "brain" activity of the mob, of the gentusa, of the muchedumbre, of the "Pöbel", of the slaves and serfs, in nuce, of the notorious masses. It is Reason, Vernunft, which converts the sensations, the sensorial perceptions, into Concepts, into Begriffe. This also implies that the masses do not think for themselves; Reason thinks for them. In this case, it is the nobility and clergy who produced the dominant feudalist ideas and thoughts, who produced Catholic Philosophy.

William: Well, Professor, I will continue.

Then the "storms of change" invaded Europe; the old order was destroyed and capitalism was ushered in. Everywhere the Enlightenment took its toll, especially in the fields of philosophy. The "Aufklärung" was on the order of the day, and Kant and Hegel prepared the superstructural ground for the new class order, for the industrial accumulation of Capital, of Vernunft, of Weltgeist.

Patricia: Of course, the bourgeois-democratic revolution was also reflected in the domain of philosophy; the new rulers had to topple intellectus and had to replace it with their own class representation, with ratio, with Vernunft, with Capital. The new order had the following hierarchical superstructure :

 1. Ratio, Reason, Vernunft.

 2. Intellectus, Intellect, Verstand.

 3. Sensatio, Sensation, Sinneswahrnehmung.

Mahatma: Now I can follow, thus, the bourgeois-industrial Reason triumphed over the feudalist- agricultural Intellect; lumpen-proletarian Sense-Perception was left out in the cold, in the coal mines and factories.

Karl: What about Contemporary Reason?

Coseino: Nowadays, Ratio concerns Ideenerkenntnis, recognition of ideas, more precisely, re-cognition of dominant ideas, of capitalist ideology. Also, Reason produces, constructs the modern metaphysical concepts which portray virtual reality. Already Kant had introduced the new era, when he gave Intellekt, Verstand, the responsible job to care for the "sensations", for sensorial perceptions, to develop officially sanctioned "Denkformen", thought forms, in short, Kategorien (categories). Now, Ratio, Reason is the Supreme Organ, it determines, as Hegel puts it, that that, what is real - Capitalism - is rational, and vice versa. It is this Maximum Reason which organizes and relates all Verstandesbegriffe (intellectual concepts) neatly within a Totality, producing the "Newspeak" of Globalization. Intellect has been converted into a commodity for the world market; like the "human being" who had acquired "rights", "human rights", now the Intellect is honoured with "copyrights".

Indira: It is evident that our Concept "Intellect a n d Reason" has nothing in common with what has been explained above. Oh! Professor! We have to be on our way. Your colleague is already knocking at the door.

Coseino: Well, well. All's well, that ends well! But, we have just begun. Worse even, we begin  a n d  we end,  a n d  we don't begin  a n d  we don't end!

(Coseino leaves the aula magna. Outside in a tree, a prodigal parrot screams. Laughing at Coseino, it prattles: Gnothi seautón! Know Thyself! Coseino, surprised, shrinks back, catches himself and then replies with a broad smile: Knowledge exists as Emancipation!)

(NEXT)