Being and Having - Gabriel Marcel

This I do sec: that the privilege or primacy which I ascribe to my mental equipment, and to what belongs to it, is conceived or imagined by analogy with the fundamental and unthinkable privilege which distinguishes my body in so far as it is mine. In this privilege my ideas, in so far as they are mine, have an indirect share.

Would it make sense to say that having and being are, as it were, essential concentrations of space and time? I am not sure.

April 7th

Being and Having 1949 - Gabriel Marcel

Chapter I [A Metaphysical Diary] - Page  86

A translation by: Katharine Farrer

 of Eire et Avoir

One of the most important points, for Gabriel Marcel - as an existentialist - is "being and having".

According to him, " when we hope, we do not have hope. We are hope. Similarly, we do not have a belief. We are belief."[1]

" My body insofar as it is my body, is both something that I have and something that I am, and can not be adequately accounted for using either of those descriptions alone."[2]

So consequently, an individual never can be completely connected to h/imself in one direction. 

[1], [2] With reference to: Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy 



- Relevant:
*h/imself = herself/himself 

*h/is = her/his

*s/he = she/he

Relation with God 48 IX A 318 - S. Kierkegaard.

A person can relate to GOD in the truest way only as an individual, for one always best acquires the conception of one's own worthlessness alone, it is well nigh impossible to convey this to another with proper clarity, and it would in any case easily become affection. 

Important in Life 36 I A 279 - S. Kierkegaard.

It is very important in life to know when your cue comes.

 

Important in Life 36 I A 279 - S. Kierkegaard.

Is signature not required? 46 VII I B 200 - S. Kierkegaard.

... But this I thought was the meaning of life, that the individual shook off the habit of accepting the favours of difference, should that be tempting, steeled himself against its humiliation, should that weigh down on him, in order to find the universal, what is common to all human beings, to concern himself only with that. Oh! how beautiful to lose oneself in this way. But then I thought again that in the having of this concern the meaning of life was to be concerned for oneself as if the particular individual was all there was. Oh! how beautiful thus to find oneself in the universal! If the universal is the rule then the individual is the paradigm [corrected from: demand]; if the universal is the demand then the individual is the fulfillment; if the universal is everything, if the universal says everything, then the particular individual believes that the everything is said about him - him alone.

So if the place and context here did not require a signature, none would be needed, for again it is infinitely inconsequential who has said it (as though the favoured one said it, the one who was one said it, the one who was wronged being in no position to say it, since after all they all have it in them to do it.)

Is signature not required? 46 VII I B 200 - S. Kierkegaard.