I am posting this to try and vet some of my intuitions about metaphysics. It is very rough and unpolished, but I think I say what I am trying to say at the moment.
Don’t bother to read if you find philosophy boring—it is not very exciting prose, to say the least. Heck, it is probably not very good philosophy!
Metaphysics is a question of things.
Some-thing, any-thing, no-thing, and every-thing all express what it is we want to know about metaphysics—what we want to know about the world we assume to be a thing.
The “world” is the space that things inhabit. But that world is itself a thing.
So, the question becomes a question that grants the earlier point (of some-thing… over no-thing)…
and asks: What is a thing? Or, how does a thing becomes a thing—some-thing, any-thing, every-thing?
Here we find that a thing must be more than a thing.
It must be (“exist” is a better word) a subject.
To “exist,” in this way, is to be a subject.
An object, then, is no-thing.
A subject is everything else, including the object when we give it the integrity of some-thing, any-thing, or every-thing.
Now we move to question of how subjects remain “some-things”–how they remain in-the-world.
Which is precisely the question of constitution.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In