The Will to Exist and the Primacy of the Good
In my philosophy, the sole universal is the “will to exist.” Existence is to be; non-existence is not to be. Here, Good is defined as the affirmation of existence, while Evil is its negation. Furthermore, as existence is characterized by its generation and annihilation, generation represents the affirmation of existence, and annihilation represents its negation.
The affirmation or negation of existence is enacted through gift and deprivation. Given that existence is finite, whenever something is gained, something else is lost. This is because to exist is to inherently encompass non-existence. If existence were infinite, all would be uniform; neither generation and annihilation, nor gift and deprivation, could occur. However, such infinity could lead to the negation of the “will to exist”—the sole universal—for if existence is not finite and diverse, universality itself ceases to be.
Conversely, for all beings, if the “will to exist” did not exist, existence itself would not be, and all would perish. When existence encompasses non-existence, the “will to exist” simultaneously encompasses a “will to perish.” The fact that the “will to exist” is universal implies its primacy over the “will to perish.” Otherwise, existence would not manifest. Thus, as long as existence persists, the “will to exist” remains dominant, demonstrating the primacy of Good in the conflict between Good and Evil.
Good is the affirmation of existence, realized through gift and deprivation, but only insofar as these acts sustain existence. Should gift or deprivation lead to the annihilation of existence, the act shifts from affirmation to negation. By establishing the “will to exist” as the sole universal, my philosophy emphasizes and appeals to the necessity of the “Good”—the act of affirming existence—over the “Evil” of negation, so that existence may remain.
The Manifestation of Will and the Role of Symbolism
The actualization of the Will is explained through symbols. The will of the “Self” is realized through the “Other.” The Self is a being that maintains order, while the Other is that which possesses a different order or disrupts the order of the Self. The Will of the Self manifests to perform adjustments when its order is disturbed by the Other.
Because the Self and the Other possess different orders, their respective orders are perpetually disrupted. By existing, the Self is in a constant state of adjusting its order with the Other. This constant adjustment implies that the manifestation of Will is not always required; since adjustment is continuous, a certain kind of order already exists.
The manifestation of Will is, in essence, the manifestation of consciousness—the capacity to perceive. Perception arises when the act of adjusting order between the Self and the Other becomes multi-layered and complex. This perception is mediated through symbols. The Self and the Other actualize their respective wills through a third party: the Symbol.
Because the Self is bound by the finitude of the physical body, perception can only manifest through the Other. In the realm of perception as Will, even the body becomes “othered.” Furthermore, perception seeks to reconcile the differences in order between the Self and the Other. When Will is actualized through a symbol, that symbol represents a quest for order for the Self. However, if the Other also possesses the capacity for perception, either empathy or conflict will arise. Empathy affirms the other, while conflict negates the other.
In my thought, Good is the affirmation of existence, and Evil is its negation. Yet, is uniform empathy necessarily “Good”? To affirm each other uniformly contradicts the fact that existence encompasses non-existence and is finite. In other words, total affirmation leads to the negation of existence itself. The affirmation of existence can only be called such because it encompasses the possibility of its own negation.
Conclusion
Within these binary oppositions, I emphasize the power of the Symbol. My aim is to return to the symbol to re-evaluate the binary oppositions generated by the act of symbolic perception, thereby seeking a way to circumvent collision.
