Entities…

Estudia: Hi Phi. I hope you have forgiven me for bringing that illogical Menace over.

Philo: Not your fault and he was good exercise for me. Makes you wonder how someone can accept such confused ideas and think they are avoiding what is evident to every child from the get go.

Estudia: You mean we grasp these axioms at birth? I don’t see how that’s possible.

Philo: No, not all together and not as we are discussing them now as adults. A child does gain awareness of existence immediately when its senses begin delivering stimuli to its developing brain — probably sounds, and temperature, and pressure even before birth. Sight occurs probably only after birth. Well, maybe some bright light gets to stimulate the formed eyeball but I imagine it’s pretty dark in the womb and the loudest sound might be the mother’s heart beat. So yes in a sense we grasp the axiom existence as a new born. It is of course implicit, by that I mean it is an implied understanding. We don’t name the axiom of course until we begin to study philosophy.

Estudia: What about consciousness and identity? Are they implicit too?

Philo: Yes, but it takes a while. The child has to gather a lot more information over time before it can become aware that it exists and perceives reality. He has to identify things first and come to the understanding that you can distinguish between objects. Then identity becomes implicit in everything and the child implicitly understands the concept of entity.

Estudia: Entity, as in this thing as opposed to that thing?

Philo: Yes. The child has to integrate all the sensations he is experiencing. First he has to perceive that objects exist. The first axiom we discussed. Then he has to take the sensations of objects… babies are good at this… and form precepts of things or objects. The brain is wired to make this automatic for a healthy baby. We don’t have to think about the axiom of identity to use it. The child knows implicitly that the something is something different from other things. This concept of entity is so basic to all our thinking that it is an axiomatic concept.

Estudia: Another axiom?

Philo: An axiomatic concept, not a basic axiom. You have to point to what you are referring to, that means you specify it ostensively. You can only perceive an entity using your sense perception.

Estudia: What about a business? Isn’t that an entity?

Philo: Yes and so are lots of complex things. But in the primary sense, entity refers to something you can point at like a person, a pebble, or a table. A business is complex but it can be broken down into a collection of components or things that you can point at. Primary entities.

Estudia: So entities are things we perceive? The something referred to in the axiom of Identity?

Philo: Yes, entities are all there is to observe. A child first perceives things in the primary sense and as its knowledge grows it comes to understand your extended sense. It learns what a business is, a town, or the solar system. All entities that are a part of existence, but far above the primary sense.

Estudia: That’s interesting to think about. I think I see why entity is an axiomatic concept then.

Philo: Good. Next time we’ll talk about the attributes of entities and I’ll show you how the way entities behave says something about reality. A self-evident implication of the axioms we’re discussed so far.
Estudia: I can’t wait. Later.