Saturday 6 February 2010

To be or not to be

To be or not to be.....

How do we understand the meaning of this sentence?......



18 comments:

  1. Anonymous13:19

    I understood it, actually, today. I was seeing that I am trying to be all the time. It is unconsciously, I think, but my mind is trying " to be" all the time. To be in regards to other people, very afraid of other people's judgement. To be with regards to myself, self esteem, etc

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you for your entry. Could it be that “ to be” is quite a central issue in the functioning of our brain?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous15:11

    And another question: is “ to be” = “to be safe” ?

    ReplyDelete
  4. And yet another question: is the main conflict the drive “to be” versus the apparent certainty “I will die”?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous15:42

    This would not be possible without a sense of a time to come, of a future…..

    ReplyDelete
  6. Is this capacity of “creating” a future what determines the drive “to be” and the fear of “not being”?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous17:03

    What is this sense, or as you say this capacity, of perceiving the possibility or even the certainty of a time to come?

    ReplyDelete
  8. This, seems to me quite a “human” phenomenon

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous17:14

    But the sense of “being” (OK, maybe in a more primitive form) and the fear of dying is in all kinds of animals also. I think a spider has a horror of dying, of ceasing to exist. And also he is a genetic entity that has a web, reproduces, eats, feels million sensations, etc, she is all that

    ReplyDelete
  10. Could it be that it is quite an old mechanism in evolution?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anonymous17:29

    It seems to me now, while we are talking, that it is ancient. That different animals live it and express it in different ways, but essentially this “being” is an opposition, a resistance, to the all pervading dying or “not being”

    ReplyDelete
  12. Do you see it as a “dualistic” state? As two things that are completely independent of each other?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Is “being”, then, consubstantial, intrinsic, to life, to exist?, if it is such an ancient thing, then it is not mine, not personal....almost I would “dare” to say that my “ego” is another name for this drive “to be”, and that it is not “mine”, but a way by which we humans, all of us, partake of this sense of “being”....It is just a question, I do not mean to assert it

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anonymous18:53

    By the way, do you think Shakespeare meant all this? Or something else?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Who knows. It is extraordinary that he was able to put it into words, and that we can exchange words between ourselves

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous18:57

    And this capacity of sharing experiences with words, might be a manifestation of “existing”, of “being”.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anyways, thank you for this dialogue. If you have an entry of something that happened to you, or an idea, or you want to share a thought, send it to me, I will post it. I think this blog should be of everybody that wants to share something...

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anonymous19:03

    we'll have more

    ReplyDelete