Fare clic per modificare lo stile del sottotitolo dello schema

Two cases of categorial analysis: categories with positional value and the difference between time and temporality Roberto Poli

The framework

Foundations of Ontology (1935)

Possibility and Actuality (1938)

The Construction of the Real World (1940)

Philosophy of Nature (1950)

Dasein/SoseinReal/Ideal

Emotional transcendent acts

ModalitiesTwo primary spheres of

being and two secondary spheres

General theory of categoriesLevels of reality

Special theory of categoriesComplex formations

Foundations of Ontology (1935)

Possibility and Actuality (1938)

The Construction of the Real World (1940)

Philosophy of Nature (1950)

Dasein/SoseinReal/Ideal

Emotional transcendent acts

Actuality, Possibility, Necessity

Two primary spheres of being and two secondary

spheres General theory of categoriesLevels of reality

Special theory of categoriesComplex formations

Kliknij, aby edytować format tekstu konspektu

Drugi poziom konspektu Trzeci poziom

konspektu Czwarty

poziom konspektu

Piąty poziom konspektu

Szósty poziom konspektu

Siódmy poziom konspektu

Ósmy poziom konspektu

Dziewiąty poziom konspektuFare clic per modificare stili del testo dello schema

Kliknij, aby edytować format tekstu konspektu Drugi poziom

konspektu Trzeci poziom

konspektu Czwarty

poziom konspektu

Piąty poziom konspektu

Szósty poziom konspektu

Siódmy poziom konspektu

Ósmy poziom konspektu

Dziewiąty poziom konspektuFare clic per modificare stili del testo dello schema Secondo livello

Terzo livello Quarto livello

Quinto livello

Kliknij, aby edytować format tekstu konspektu Drugi poziom

konspektu Trzeci poziom

konspektu Czwarty

poziom konspektu

Piąty poziom konspektu

Szósty poziom konspektu

Siódmy poziom konspektu

Ósmy poziom konspektu

Dziewiąty poziom konspektuFare clic per modificare stili del testo dello schema Secondo livello

Terzo livello Quarto livello

Quinto livello

The architecture of categories

Group 1 Principle-concretum Structure-modus Form-matter Inner-outer Determination-

dependence Quality-quantity

Group 2 Unity-multiplicity Harmony-conflict Opposition-dimension Discreteness-continuity Substratum-relation Element-complex

Fundamental categories The Dasein/Sosein articulation Modal categories Paired categories Level categories Categorial laws

Special categories

Space Time Causality Process Substance …

Kliknij, aby edytować format tekstu konspektu

Drugi poziom konspektu Trzeci poziom

konspektu Czwarty

poziom konspektu

Piąty poziom konspektu

Szósty poziom konspektu

Siódmy poziom konspektu

Ósmy poziom konspektu

Dziewiąty poziom konspektuFare clic per modificare stili del testo dello schema

Kliknij, aby edytować format tekstu konspektu Drugi poziom

konspektu Trzeci poziom

konspektu Czwarty

poziom konspektu

Piąty poziom konspektu

Szósty poziom konspektu

Siódmy poziom konspektu

Ósmy poziom konspektu

Dziewiąty poziom konspektuFare clic per modificare stili del testo dello schema Secondo livello

Terzo livello Quarto livello

Quinto livello

Kliknij, aby edytować format tekstu konspektu Drugi poziom

konspektu Trzeci poziom

konspektu Czwarty

poziom konspektu

Piąty poziom konspektu

Szósty poziom konspektu

Siódmy poziom konspektu

Ósmy poziom konspektu

Dziewiąty poziom konspektuFare clic per modificare stili del testo dello schema Secondo livello

Terzo livello Quarto livello

Quinto livello

Categories with positional value

Group 1 Principle-concretum Structure-modus Form-matter Inner-outer Determination-

dependence Quality-quantity

Group 2 Unity-multiplicity Harmony-conflict Opposition-dimension Discreteness-

continuity Substratum-relation Element-complex

Fundamental categories The Dasein/Sosein articulation Modal categories Paired categories Level categories Categorial laws

Special categories

Space Time Causality Process Substance …

Categorial relations

Categories are connected by a variety of relations

Apart from continuous transitions (quality-quantity), three other types of transition are relevant (A.25d) Alternation of the two opposed categories (my

‘positional’ value) Unilateral transition towards a fixed point; one of

the two opposites remains stable and the other gradually changes and comes closer and closer to the unchanging category – e.g., relation-substrate with substrate as the fixed point

Bilateral transition without fixed points – harmony and conflict (A.25d, f) (bilateral transitions are structural moments of modal relations as well)

Beyond the above simple implications, there is a huge variety of other relations among the members of the different pairs, too numerous to be described (A.47b)

A general meta-pattern

Alternating categories with positional value

The horizontal determination: The same X (= entity) has both A and B

The vertical determination: The A of X is the B of Y; the B of X is the A of Z Dasein—Sosein Matter—form Element-complex Inner-outer; Etc.

An exemplification The Dasein of the tree is the Sosein of

the forest The Dasein of the branch is the Sosein of

the tree The Dasein of the leaf is the Sosein of

the branch The Dasein of the rib is the Sosein of the

leaf … The other way out

The Sosein of the leaf is the Dasein of the rib

The Sosein of the branch is the Dasein of the leaf

The Sosein of the tree is the Dasein of the branch

The Sosein of the forest is the Dasein of the tree

Z

X

Y

A

A

B

B

The Dasein of the branch is the Sosein of the tree

The Sosein of the branch is the Dasein of the leaf

Matter and form

Matter not as ‘prime matter’, form not as ‘substantial form’

Matter and form refer to what can acquire form and what can give form

Forms have content; they determine the structure of entities and constitute the Sosein of entities

Matter can always be form of a lower matter, and form can always be the matter of a higher form

The demise of the old doctrine of substantial forms and the beginning of modern science paved the way for a better understanding of the relation between matter and form (A.28a)

The relation between matter and form is called superforming

Z

X

Y

A

A

B

B

Substrate and Relation

Real categories are constituted by material components; the lower material components are those with a character of substrate (A.24e)

All entities are determined by relations, both internal and external. Every isolation is secondary and exclusively due to acts of abstractions. Without relation, there is neither unity nor multiplicity; form and quality depend on relations (A.28.a).

While relations can have other relations as their arguments, at some point the series of relations within relations within relations etc. must end. Sooner or later, there must be a substrate that is not the result of a relational construction (A.25c, e)

Processual laws are a special class of relations (A.28c)

The dimension of possible determinations has the character of sub-strate (A.2c). Dimension as a locus for elements and their ordering (A.24c). The connection between substrate and dimension determines the relation between elements and continua (A.24c)

Element and complex

Complexes are relational entities. The elements of a complex are members, not substrates. Elements are determined by the complex of which they are members (A.25c)

Complexes have their own determinations, which extend across the complex’s elements and transforms them. Elements are essentially determined by the positions they occupy within the complex’s series of relations (A.33a). This explains why elements have functions within the complex The main difference between complex and totality

is that a complex has some autonomy vis-à-vis its members, while a totality has no autonomy vis-à-vis its parts. Totalities depend on their parts, while elements depend on their complex

Within limits, if a totality loses one of its parts, the totality becomes different but the lost part remains the same; if a complex loses one of its elements, the complex remains the same but the element becomes different (A.33a)

Inner and outer

Outer forces of nuclei are inner forces of atoms (A.34b). Outer forces of lower-order entities are inner forces of higher-order ones

Only entities that have some ontic autonomy have an inside. Within nature, dynamic and organic systems are the most well-known cases

Not everything has an inside, and not everything is what results from its inner structure. Force does not need to be the exterior-ization of anything else, and effects do not need to be the exteriorizations of causes (A.34b)

Determinations do not need to be internal to things (or constitute their interiors). Most real nexuses are external determinations. Causality is the most obvious case (A.24e)

For all complexes, the inside of the complex is constituted by the relations among its members, while the outside of the complex is constituted by the relations between the complex and other complexes. Every outside can become the inside of a higher-order complex (A.25d)

Pattern 2

A confounding asymmetry Case 1

Entity—Being (or ‘being’ and ‘Being’)

True—truth; Real—reality; Actual—actuality

The ‘many-one’ pattern: nominalization is always unique (many beings (entities), one Being; many reals, one reality, etc.)

Specifications not as ‘types of’ but as ‘ways of’ (Being, Truth, Reality are one; there are different ways of having Being, Truth or Reality)

Case 2 Space—spatiality Time—temporality

Nominalizations as properties (moments) of entities, not as categories ‘space’ is a category,

‘spatiality’ is the property of entities that are in space

‘time’ is a category, ‘temporality’ is the property of entities that are in time. Etc.

Specifications not as ‘types of’ but as ‘regions of’ space, time

The category

Space—time—cause

The moment

Spatiality—temporality—

causality

Time and temporality

Ontologically, there is only one time. Regions of time can be distinguished, not species of time Historical time, f.i., is not a subtype of real time,

but a region of time Similarly, cosmic time, the time of life, and the

time of consciousness are all regions of real time, not subtypes of time

Time of consciousness is the only situation in which time exhibits a kind of bifurcation (between intuitive time and the time of experience). The former concerns contents of consciousness, while the latter is the time of the flow of consciousness. Both are in the same real time, however, and both are subject to the same laws of time

Understand time through temporality As well known since the times of Augustine,

the categorial structure of time is difficult to articulate, because the categorial moments of temporality are hidden one behind the other, at different levels of depth

The moments of temporality are organized into three levels of depth: First-order level of temporality: Unidimensionality,

flowing, and the moment-now Second-order level of temporality: Simultaneity,

succession, and duration Third-order level of temporality: Uniformity,

parallelism, and actuality

1st-order moments of temporality

Unidimensionality is what makes temporality simpler than spatiality. It implies that temporality is not a system of dimensions The multiplicity of what is extended in time is

remarkably smaller than the multiplicity of what is extended in space. Unilinear relations can only overlap with each other

The flowing is the true characterizing moment of temporality. Its clarification, however, can be conducted only together with the subsequent moment

The organization of the flow of temporality through the moment-now (the ‘specious’ present in the case of psychological time) is the most surprising moment of real time. Indeed, there is no need for the flow of temporality to have such a privileged point, stage or position. If one looks at the stream of occurrences from the outside – in an atemporal way, as it were – no privileged point results and all the stages of temporality are equivalent

Unidimensionality FlowingMoment-now

First-order moments of temporality

The flow of temporality does not move with respect to what is atemporal as if the latter were at rest. What is atemporal, like everything ideal, encompasses all the stages and components of the flow. What is atemporal does not distinguish any moment-now

Even less correct is the interpretation of the moment-now as connected to the position of a subject. A perceiving subject is in some moment of time. Real temporality flows even when no subject perceives temporal occurrences

Together with the temporal flow of events, there is always the moment in which many different processes cross one another

The moment-now is constantly renewed: it happens only once, and immediately afterwards it disappears and never returns. Each moment-now is replaced by a subsequent moment-now, and these continuous substitutions of moments-now one after the other constitute a property of the flow of temporality

Digging deeper

Every now is a characterizing moment of reality, and this aspect does not depend on the flow of temporality. The ontic prevalence of each now over every other temporal point is an “irreducible peculiarity of reality” (Hartmann 1980, 151)

The customary way to understand the prevalence of the now over other temporal determinations is to assume that only the present is real, denying being to the past and the future. This conception does not respect phenomena

While it correctly acknowledges the priority of the now, it does not explain the reasons for its priority

By denying being to past (and future, for that matter), it severs the roots of the now (non-being cannot have any influence on being)

Consequences

Before passing to the second- and third-order moments of temporality, I list a few more aspects of temporality that can be clarified on the basis of the first-order moments of temporality alone: The unidimensionality and the flow of temporality

are mutually and intimately connected with each other; whilst in principle space can have any number of dimensions, the flowing of temporality justifies its unidimensionality

Unidimensionality does not determine the direction of temporality: temporality can flow either way, toward the future or toward the past. The flow of temporality, however, constrains the possible direction of real time: it can proceed only along the flow itself. It follows that all real processes, for all levels of reality, are irreversible

The multiplicity of what is simultaneous implies that there are other dimensions of being beyond time (e.g., space)

The moment-now is the point zero of the flow of time. Therefore, real time has a natural system of coordinates (space does not)

Consequences

Real time is homogeneous. Neither divisions nor distinctions into parts characterize real time. The series of moments-now is homogeneous, without internal differences; which implies that moments-now regularly follow one another. As a consequence, real time cannot flow more rapidly or more slowly, as is instead the case of intuitive time

The homogeneous flow of time is continuous. The continuity of the flow supports the continuity of movement. Real time is unlimited. The lack of limitations of real time depends on its nature as a dimension, not on it being a flow. Every limit is a limit in time, not a limit of time. Time is not extended, it does not have duration; if anything, time is the categorial precondition for every possible temporal extension

The flow of time always is; it is everlasting. There is always a new moment-now

Consequences

The connections between measurement and magnitude are the same for both space and time: Real time determines the nature of temporal

magnitudes, as real space determines the magnitude of spatial magnitudes. For both, extensive magnitudes are at stake. Apart from this, spatial and temporal dimensions are neither homogeneous nor isometric one another

Temporal extensions do not resolve themselves into numerical magnitudes either. Time is homogeneous, unextended and without magnitude

Real magnitudes do not follow from the dimension of time. If time were extended, it would be either finite or infinite

Since time is not only dimension, but also flow, two different species of measurement are needed. Besides extension, the velocity of the flow should be measured. It may be interesting to note that space, too, has two different magnitudes – length (extension) and angle. While both categories present the moment of extension, they differ as to the second species of measurement: angles for space, and the velocity of the flow for time. Time does not provide the units of measurement for either extension or velocity, however

2nd-order moments of temporality

Second-order moments articulate the forms of temporal relations 

Simultaneity is far from being a pure temporal relation. For natural beings, spatial dimensions play a role as well. Simultaneity, therefore, is determined by a variety of heterogeneous dimensions. Time is indifferent to the heterogeneity of what coexist simultaneously

Succession is the counterpart of simultaneity. Temporal continuity is a special kind of continuity. In this sense, the image of the flow is only partially adequate. Succession is the coming and going of temporal stages, the passage from one stage to the next. It is processes that have temporal stages. A process, however, is not a summation of its stages

Strictly, the moment-now is a temporal point, a limit without extension. Things, organisms, historical epochs need time; they extend over a stretch of time. Duration is the continuation of succession. Whether something remains identical while the process unfolds cannot be decided by analysing the moments of time. Time neither requires nor excludes something absolutely persisting

Simultaneity

SuccessionDuration

3rd-order moments of temporality

The vibration of light or the rotation of the Earth cannot be experienced. All real rhythms overlap, and the flow of time is indifferent to our capacity to describe or experience them. The flow of time is only the continuity of time, with no internal articulation. The flow proceeds uniformly over all events

The flow is perfectly constant; it is without any difference of velocity, without accelerations or decelerations. More precisely, one should say that the flow of time has no velocity. The flow of time does not refer to any time; it is time The image of time having a constant velocity is

imprecise. “I would have no objection if you prefer to say that time cannot proceed either in a uniform or in a not uniform way, or that time has no velocity at all.” But then he notes that “in so doing it would be impossible to say that the flow of time is the basis of all temporal events as their categorial precondition” (Hartmann 1980, 182, note)

Parallelism means that all temporal processes run at the same velocity. No temporal process overtakes any other temporal process or falls behind it. There is an important difference between the moment of uniformity of the flow and parallelism

Uniformity Parallelism Actuality

Third-order moments of temporality

Uniformity entails that the flow of time neither accelerates nor decelerates. Processes do not have their own temporal movements. The only temporal movement is the movement of time. Only in space are there differences of velocity. Things can freely move in space, not in time. The identity of temporal movement is what makes spatial velocities comparable. The constraints on free movements are not spatial constraints, but if anything are dynamic ones

Events are chained to their temporal positions. They march together with the entire flow. All the dimensions that traverse time – such as spatial, causal, etc. dimensions – are such that there can be movements in them. The only dimension without any internal movement is time

Moment-now

There are two different meanings of moment-now: a fleeting moment of time, and the now-in-movement (=actuality)

The advance of the moment-now provides the present with its ontological nature. Firstly, since the present advances in the flow of time – it is constantly actual – it is not the boundary between past and future. Furthermore, like the now-in-movement; the actual is the window through which events continually enter. For each instant, actuality is a new moment-now. Actuality maintains itself in the flow of time; it is not fleeting. In this sense, the actual is an “eternal present”. The series of the fleeting moments of the now constitutes the constancy of actuality, or of the now-in-movement

Actuality

What happens to an entity while it lasts? The lasting of the entity is its continuance in its actuality. While it lasts, it proceeds together with the now-in-movement, it maintains itself in the flowing-now. The duration of a process means that the process proceeds together with the now; it maintains itself in the now-in-movement. This applies to all durations, be they things, living beings, populations, or creations of the mind. Their durations mean that they keep themselves in the now-in-movement. Duration does not imply, however, that the entire multiplicity of the phases of a process is actual in any point of time. If they were so, they could not last. The series of phases is a series of successively continuous temporal positions

Conclusion

Two categorially complex situations ‘Positional’ categories Time-temporality

The above was only meant to provide a sample of categorial analysis as developed by Hartmann

The analyses here summarized offer a little evidence in support of the claim that Hartmann’s is possibly the most articulated theory of ontological categories ever developed