Existentiality of discourse and foundation of systematic speculation in the context of fundamental ontology and the postmodern tradition

The arguments are formulated: the analytical activity of the cognizer is possible in the case of updating specific forms of reality, a condition of which is subjective connection with this reality. Discourse formed as a result of the cognitive process is a syncretic model, architectonics of which is predetermined by the ontology of this discourse. On this basis, an assumption is made that none of the known types of discourse have extra-contextual reality, that is the ontology of discourse that constitutes the retential-protential series expressed in proposals, theories, etc. finally “refuses” to familiarize the subject of cognition with both the means and the goals which somehow structure their own retential-protential continual series. The synonymization of the problems of limit substantiation and of logic prerequisites only shows the impossibility of further following. The onto-epistemological analysis of the fact as a phenomenon claiming a certain state of things indicates not only the articulation of a segment of things (as an ontic aspect), but also the identity of things in the objective reality, which determines the relevance of things in existence as a “have” for the cognizer. Therefore, this ontological problem (“having the world’’) which proves itself through the above transformation and is relevant to the ontology of discourse can be structurally represented as a contextually “unfolding” implication of any type of discourse (from everyday life to theoretical). Naturally, the bases of discourse structuring are excluded within this discourse. Distrust to the metaphor is obviously due to the fact that the cognizer is not confident in the possibility of “unification” (at least in any form) of what must be said and what will be said / expressed. Considering distrust to the metaphor, it is possible to state the need in its use. Considering the “empiricalness” of the fact and the subject-object inappropriate dichotomy, according to M. Heidegger, we can assume that the existential as “existential presence” is both the principle of the possible thematization of things (empiricalness of facts, theoretical concepts, dogmas, etc.) and the way of possible transformation of things by transforming their meanings solely.

Keywords

Authors

References