Defining Objects

There are numerous objects in the world. They are of two general types – observing and unobserving objects. I am an observing object. I interact with the space and objects as an object. I therefore mark time by interaction and by observing this time.

3 thoughts on “Defining Objects”

  1. Ah. Sounds like there is some good elaboration to be had. Posesssion takes us into a teleological realm maybe? Or a kind of Being in-itself, of Being posssessed. Or… hmmm ..


  2. Hi Landzek,

    You did introduced to me Ooo. And I have kept this in mind when writing this.

    I would argue that a differentiation is needed for the being observed to be observing or unobserving (that is, not having the ability to observe). The relationship between the observing object and another observing object is is necessarily different to that of the observing and unobserving. The former relationship is a social one, the latter is one of possession.


  3. I wonder if you are familiar with the philosopher Graham Harman. He is noted for object oriented ontology. His proposal is that human beings are not unique among universal objects. He suggests that all objects with drawl from view, and exist in a context of relation.

    Your post is a little interesting because Harmon would not say that human beings, or the thinking subject, is unique, but is merely one object in the universe of objects that exist in the same manner. In that context I think he would say that all objects are either observing or being observed depending on the given relation.


Leave a comment.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s