Reply-To: "Richard H. McCullough" <rhm@cdepot.net>
From: "Richard H. McCullough" <rhm@volcano.net>
To: "Apollo, Adrian" <thinkonaut@yahoo.com>,
	"Latimer, Richard S." <rslatimer@comcast.net>,
	"Blanchette, Ralph" <ralph_blanchette@hotmail.com>
Cc: "KR-language" <KR-language@YahooGroups.com>,
	<Owl_objectivists@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: static and dynamic existents
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 08:14:25 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2670
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2670

Food for thought

It seems reasonable to think of existents

    entity iss existent;

as having both a static nature

    entity has attribute;

and a dynamic nature (something happening in space,time) .

    at space=s,time=t {entity do action done;};

Dynamic seems very appropriate for living things,
which require some effort to continue their existence.

But what about a rock?  Is there anything inherently
dynamic about it?  Is it "doing something" to avoid
decaying into nothingness?  Maybe the perpetual motion
of its atoms?

I have said previously that

    entity do exist done;

suggesting that "exist" subsumes all "action".

But I'm now thinking "exist" is a "pseudo action"
which subsumes all characteristics.
Likewise, "characteristic" is a "pseudo attribute"
which subsumes all characteristics (maybe I'd better
start calling them properties).
And that's why 

    existence :: entity DO exist done;

is equivalent to (existence IS identity;)

    identity :: entity HAS characteristic;

They both denote the subsumption of all

    part
    attribute
    relation
    action
    interaction

of entity.

Dick McCullough
knowledge := man do identify od existent done;
knowledge haspart proposition list;
http://rhm.cdepot.net/