Dinesh's photos with the keyword: Being and Nothingness

. . . . Every work of art is a thought, an “idea”; its characteristics are plainly ideal to the extent that it is nothing but a meaning. But on the other hand, this meaning, this thought which is in one sense perpetually active as if I were perpetually forming it, as if a mind were conceiving it without respite -- a mind which would be my mind -- this thought sustains itself alone in being; it by no means ceases to be active when I am not actually thinking it. I stand to it then in the double relation of the consciousness which conceives it and the consciousness which encounters it. It is precisely this double relation which I express by saying that It is mine. . . . It is in order to enter into this double relation in the synthesis of appropriation that I create my work. In fact it is this synthesis of self and non-self (the intimacy and translucency of thought on the one hand and the opacity and indifference of in-itself on the other) that I am aiming at and which will establish my ownership of the work. In this sense it is not only strictly artistic works which I appropriate in this manner. …. Page 737

“Man is condemned to be free; because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does. It is up to you to give [life] a meaning.” wmpeople.wm.edu/asset/index/cvance/sartre

. . . .The sense organ appears to us to be affectged by the stimulant; the protoplasmic and physical-chemical modifications which appear in the sense organ are not actually produced by that organ; they come to it ‘from’ the outside. At least we assert this in order to remain faithful to the principle of inertia which constitutes all nature as exteriority. Therefore when we establish a correlation between the objective system (stimulant-sensory organ) which we presently perceive, and the subjective system which for us is the ensemble of the internal properties of the other object, then we are compelled to admit that the new motion with the stimulation of the sense is also produced by something other than itself. If it were produced spontaneously, in fact, it would immediately be cut off from all connection with the organ stimulated, or if you prefer, the relation which could be established between them would be ‘anything whatsoever.’ Therefore we shall conceive of an objective unity corresponding to even the tiniest and shortest of perceptible stimulations, and we shall call it sensation. . . . Page 413

The world is human. We can see the very particular position of consciousness: being is everywhere, opposite me, around me, it weighs down on me, it besieges me, and I am perpetually referred from being to being; that table which is there is being and ‘nothing’ more; that rock, that tree, that landscape -- being and ‘nothing’ else. I want to grasp this being and I no longer find anything by ‘myself.’ This is because knowledge, intermediate between being and non-being, refers me to absolute being it I want to make knowledge subjective and refers me to myself when I think to grasp the absolute. The very meaning of knowledge is what it is not and is not what it is; for in order to know being such as it is, it would be necessary to be that being. But there is this “such as it is” only because I am not the being which I know; and if I should become it, then the “such as it is” would vanish and could no longer even be thought. We are not dealing here either with scepticism -- which supposes precisely that the ‘such as is’ belongs to being -- or with relativism. Knowledge puts us in the presence of the absolute, and there is a truth of knowledge. But this truth, although releasing to us nothing more and nothing less than the absolute, remains strictly human. 297

There is a peculiar paradox in the Present. On the one hand, we willingly define it as 'being'; what is present 'is' -- in contrast to the future which is not yet and to the past which is no longer. But on the other hand, a rigorous analysis which would attempt to rid of the present of all which is not it -- i.e., of the past and the immediate future -- would find that nothing remained by an infinitesimal instant. As Husserl remarks in his 'Essays on the Inner Consciousness of Time' the ideal limit of a division pushed to infinity is a nothingness. Thus each time that we approach the study of human reality from a new point of view we rediscover that indissoluble dyad, 'Being and Nothingness' ~ Page 176