hyparchein

Hyparchein is a Greek word that means "to be." But it does not just mean "to exist." It ambiguously means "to obtain" or "to belong." I am trying to write a paper about it but honestly do not understand it. But there is something very special about it. I've caught scent of it and am now on the trail to find out what exactly is so wonderful and so mysterious about the phrase. Where to begin this little adventure? I can atleast help you out with the context in which it is used.

So "einai" is the most basic word for "to be" and it can mean "to exist" or it can relate a subject to a verb. So- Annakin Skywalker exists. or Annakin Skywalker is a cat.

Now, hyparchein is different. It means 'obtain' or 'belong.'

The Stoics (the blessed, amazing Stoics) used hyparchein in special instances-- Let me explain--

So for them, Something can be something without existing. This makes sense if we think a little bit. A centaur does not exist, but it has being in some other way. The community that Steinbeck describes in Sweet Thursday does not exist but it has being in some other way. After all, how could I think about or talk about a Chiron or about Doc if this wasn't so? Being is a much fuller than just 'existence.' It can signify so much more.

The Stoics believe that anything that has a body (or matter) exists. But, they also believe there are things without bodies that do not exist but still have being. In other words, they still are something. Some of these things that do not have bodies and do not exist are time, place, void, and sayables (sentences...etc).

Now even within these non-existent things there are different levels of being (which is where the word hyparchein comes in- twice!). Think of time. It (arguably) does not really exist. It just structures our world- it's a measure of day and night, light and dark, movement, rotation of planets, pull of the tide... etc. It does not "exist." But we are tempted to say that the present 'exists' more than the future or the past. The present moment is the only one that we experience NOW. But we cannot say that it 'exists' more because it doesn't 'exist.'

So the stoics use the word 'hyparchein.' The present is the only part of time that 'hyparchein' (belongs or obtains).

Same thing with 'sayables' or sentences. I can say a million different things- some true or some false. But if I say, Laine is walking down the street staring at the sky- it is only true (it only obtains or belongs) if Laine is actually doing it.

There is something powerful and glorious about moments and sentences that have this elite status of obtaining or belonging separate from existing even. There is more to being than existing or not existing. There is a way 'to obtain.'

Of course the phrase 'obtain' is still ambiguous- but there is something grand about it. And I'm still trying to find out what exactly it is.

I intuitively think that a piece of art that obtained or belonged would somehow have stated or communicated some sort of content that made logical sense but only obtained or belonged because it emerged at exactly the right time in exactly the right place for exactly the right people. This convergence made it true, made it hyparchein.

Somehow the particular time in the particular place in which an artist finds himself becomes a sanctuary, a holy ground- set apart for him, from which emerges something that belongs and can be communicated as true.

Anyway, hyparchein.... interesting.

Morbus

'Morbus' is the Latin word for disease. The Stoic philosopher- Chryssipus used the word 'Pathos' (affection/emotion) interchangeably with 'morbus.' Of course, from most modern philosophers, he has gotten quite a bit of flack for this interchange. Having a bad day and saying "I'm so ill right now" rather than "I'm so emotional right now" seems a little counter intuitive and, quite frankly, wrong.

The Stoics thought the entirety of the human soul was rational. We usually think of it colloquially as being a bit more complicated than that. We think of our desires, our thoughts, our will, our emotions, our instincts, our intuitions... etc There are quite a few words we use to describe our states of being. The stoics thought all of these stemmed from our rational faculty. Another way to say this, was that all of these states of being stemmed from our beliefs or judgements about things.

Actually i can't finish this post... unfortunate timing

Quid

Quid means why in Latin- and as far as I am concerned it is the most pesky question. It's always hanging about and the farther your follow it, the harder it gets to answer. But, thanks to the powers at be for making the human mind the way it is, human reason is equipped with machinery that does not ask you if you want to ask why, it just assumes you do. The why seems to be tied inextricably to the process of thought. It generates the premise that everything has a because. I think the why hangs some people up more than others or actually maybe just in different ways. Maybe some people are more obsessed with the theoretical why; others with the practical. Our mind is designed to begin at a premise and proceed from it to another and then to another. The why is most pesky when it rears its head at the premise. Why start here? Why is this so? And we just have to answer. Because.

An easier 'why' has reared its head at the start of this blog. It's simple and, like all why's, it must be asked- Quid blogare volo? (Why do I want to blog- and yes, I do in fact believe that the Romans used 'blogare' as the infinitive 'to blog'). Well, the answer is complicated as are most- but to put it simply- I think I want to talk consistently in a way that comes more naturally to me i.e. writing rather than talking. I want to see what it is that I think about practical and non-practical things. In the mind of a (7), movement from one idea to the next is faster than mental apparatus can grasp and remember each idea. The only way to hold onto things thought, for me, is to write them down and reread them, or have them fortuitously (or not so fortuitously) re-occur. This is an attempt at helping recurrence. Also, you cannot lose a blog (but you can lose a journal or 7). (Unless you forget the password, which unfortunately, in Peru, happened to us).

Also, another reason could be that here, in Scotland, I feel less of myself because I am less with like-minded people whom I love and by whom I am loved. This is an attempt to be known far away. I appreciate everyone who has blogs to let me see what they would be telling me over coffee or just sitting on their bed talking.

Well, If this was a ship I would christen her (the word christen is amazing) but since it's not, let's pretend it is (because that makes the most sense).

"I name this ship Over Iris and may she bring fair winds and good fortune to all who sail on her." Or

"I name this ship Over Iris may God bless her and all who sail in her."

Now, standard procedure would be to break champagne over her (or wine). Which I will act out now.

Well, that business is done! And here we go!

(Interestingly, the Titanic was never christened and the USS Arizona was only christened with water... superstitious? maybe. but, what's wrong with erring on the side of caution)