Hegel's Penomenology of Spirit:
106.
ARGUMENT:
the Now pointed has ceased to be in the pointing
the Now that is - is another
and so Now is just this - no more than just when it is
the Now that is pointed to has been - it has not the truth of being
'has been' is not an essence that is - it is not
it is with being we are concerned
COMMENTARY
we can mark a moment with a name - i.e. - 'this is red'
but the marker - as a mark persists - beyond the moment
if its reference is just to the moment - in the next moment it will not be true
for the statement to have meaning beyond its utterance - and this you might argue is
indeed the whole point of the mark - of the marking - it must be understood in a non-
momentary sense -
my 'moment' here is Hegel's 'immediate'
language thus we can say does not refer to the moment - to the immediate
the act of language as in utterance is immediate
the point of language as a marker is just that it is not immediate
so all this raises the question of reference -
if 'this is red' - does not refer to the content of a conscious apprehension of a moment -
what does it refer to?
what does the mark refer to?
and we can ask - what does any language refer to if the moment (that is gone) is not its
reference - and here I mean by reference - meaning?
my view is that there is no reference - that language in fact does not refer - in the
sense of correspond to
- or if indeed it does refer - strictly speaking the reference is unknown -
the point of language is just that it is a means of characterizing the unknown - and
enabling language users to operate in the unknown
this is what the making of marks is about in a logical sense
language in this sense is a sophisticated tool
my argument is that language is the reference - language is the making of a reference -
the mark made is the reference
there is no reference - no known reference - outside of language
that is we have reference - because of language
outside of consciousness is the unknown - language of any form is the means of
characterizing the unknown
characterization - that is the positing of reference - is necessary in order for us to
operate in and negotiate the emptiness
also it needs to be pointed out that the unknown - as unknown is without temporality -
or spatiality for that matter
temporal references that is to a present a past and a future - are characterizations of the
unknown
necessary characteriszations if we are to organize our experience - our world
they are as with all characterization given by consciousness to the unknown
consciousness that is provides platforms for action
some platforms are indispensable - and others simply useful
the known world is a construct of consciousness
the unknown is the object of consciousness
finally -
'now' - is 'no-time'
it is no-time because it can never be marked
temporal sequencing is a reflective act designed to create relations between events
it is the relation of sequence
does this sequencing - making of relations - refer to anything?
that is does 'time' exist in some sense outside of the act of sequencing?
no
the act of sequencing is all time is
it is an act of order - of ordering -
the point of which is to give the unknown sequence
