5 Answers

  1. You can't just be, you can only be for someone. For example, you do not exist by yourself (this is essentially a meaningless idea), but for other people, animals, plants, and so on. But for others who do not have a language, you exist as if in a fog, your existence is not fully manifested, it seems to flicker. You fully exist precisely for those who understand you through language. In the same way, you call out from non-existence or half-existence to those who or what exists for you. Until you understand it through language, it exists for you at the level of pre-linguistic uncertainty. In language, however, it finds definiteness and completeness of being.

    I hope it wasn't completely chaotic. Heidegger is quite difficult to retell in simple words.

  2. Look around you. For example, I can see a room: a table, a lamp, a wall, or a cup.

    If there were no language and no words, what would be left?

    A single undivided space, a play of colors, light and shadow.

    Can you imagine what life would be like without using words? It's hard for me to imagine.

    It is language that gives us the sense of separation and duality that we need to live in society.

  3. This means that the language has its own digital code and wave nature. The ancient treatises say ” In the beginning there was sound. ” Language is sound. The formation of your personal reality depends on your speech, intonation, richness of terms , formulations and complex sentences, allegories and philosophy. That's what this phrase means.

  4. Different definitions of being are possible.�

    For example, being is something that exists objectively, independently of us, as opposed to certain illusions about what exists.�

    Or being is the way in which something exists that a person perceives as existing.�

    In general, we can assume that being is everything that a person perceives in principle, regardless of any supposed existence outside of human perceptions.�

    That is, being is something that actually exists (has a certain authentic existence) for a particular person.

    Thus, given that people may have different views on true existence, the simplest and most consistent definition seems to be: being is what a person considers to be being.

    And if we say that “language is the house of being,” then we consider words to be being. It follows that for us, then, only that which can be described in words can have a true existence.

    This is a special relationship to the world, which appears only when a person describes it in words and disappears along with the disappearance of these descriptions themselves.

    And it seems that this is idealism-there is only something born of thought.

    But this is also materialism, which, in search of objectivity, creates descriptions of what is hidden behind direct perceptions, for example, the laws of the universe, which are not directly perceived outside of explanations created on the basis of words in a particular language (including mathematical ones).

    Actually, everything that is created by man, including his numerous descriptions of being (as something that has a true existence) in one way or another it is formulated in words, and therefore it lives exactly as long as the belief in their real existence lives.

    The disappearance of direct perceptions (including those of words), the home of which is not only language, but the whole of life in general, does not always depend on a person, and even more so on his faith, so they are more like a true independent existence for a person.

  5. It is believed, not only in our country, that the Russian language is more sensual than German. It is this sensuous language of ours that defines our careless existence, and the German ration in the language created their existence, which is distinguished by meticulousness, accuracy, and punctuality.

    🙂 We still have a quarter (this year's statistics) of the population living with a toilet in the yard, and the Germans had a luft closet in every house back in the nineteenth century.

Leave a Reply