home conceptual adventuring

  individuation of the world
gary e. davis
May 10, 2017

Enacting “my” life (genesis of individuation) is the basis for there being options for articulating its genealogy (“ontogeny”). But academics not only commonly confuse that difference (as if making a life is tracing through what developmental models articulate). “Ontogeny” is standardly defined biologically—not attending to individuation at all: “the biological development or course of development of an individual organism — distinguished from phylogeny,” says Merrian-Webster Unabridged. And that’s it!: “...a biological development....”

But ‘onto-’ tropes a lineage of phenomenological interest—and mythical at that: “...from Greek ont-, On, present participle of einai to be...”

being genesis

being of genesis? genesis of being?

Perhaps the original appeal of self-inquiry (or inquiry into supposed self-generativity of being) is better troped by a new term: begenesis.

One aspect of the prefix ‘be-’ is enactive or generative, as in “5...cause to be...,” M-W. So, begenesis is a good term! We know being. We are. We feel the appeal of being and the appeal of thinking about this. We know we grew up to be able to respond to an appeal of interesting notions, like questions about our genesis.

In a notion of begeny—odd, at first—we might feel a connection to our lived genesis of individuation that is occluded by ‘ontogeny’.

This becomes more appealing—though more odd at first—when I think of replacing the ‘onto’ with ‘be-’ in ‘ontology’. Was “the” logos “of” “being” always destined to be the being of “logos”? Is beology this?

The classical Greek appeal of Logos was nebulous, a constellation of foci lacking a conception of the constellation as such: “word, reason, speech, account” (M-W). One might reasonably think that the constellation as such was an interest in accessible intelligence or sociable good sense. This is quite ordinary, nothing like the high conceptual mythologies of the academy: “1 reason or the manifestation of reason conceived in ancient Greek philosophy as constituting the controlling principle in the universe: a : a moving and regulating principle in the universe together with an element in man by which according to Heraclitus this principle is perceive,” (M-W).

“Oh gods we constellate among the stars, let us know the controlling principle of the universe embodied in man.”

Let us domesticate Nature? Let us be habituated as suits our suiting?

Logos: “b : a cosmic governing or generating principle according to the Stoics that is immanent and active in all reality and that pervades all reality”

Oh love of generativity, be immanently all pervading: begenerativity?

c : a principle that according to Philo is intermediate between ultimate or divine reality and the sensible world”

Let there be the difference between what we can comprehend (already being so beyond the sensible world) and what is yet incomprehensible that must have generated the comprehensible because intelligibility is there for us (who are empowered to translate into good sense what has been divined).


< previous -|- Next: conceptions of emergingness -|- topic: for love of conceptual inquiry

  Be fair. © 2017, gary e. davis