Kaip judėti metafizinio mąstymo lauke
LTReikšminiai žodžiai: Antanas Maceina; Aristotelis; Būtis; Būtybė; Derrida; Esinys; Esmė; Gramatika; Heideggeris; Jonas Balkevičius; Kalbotyra; Metafizika; Metaizinis mąstymas; Niekas; Tomas Akvinietis; Veiksmažodis būti; Antanas Maceina; Aristotle; Being; Derrida; Entity; Essence; Grammar; Heidegger; Jonas Balkevičius; Linguistics; Living being; Metaphysical thinking; Metaphysics; Nobody; Nothing; Thomas Aquinas; Verb to be.
ENAll metaphysical thinking rests upon derivatives of the verb to be. National languages have more or less different systems of derivatives. That means that they have different means of moving within the field of metaphysical thinking, and it is quite natural that they describe that field more or less differently. This causes complexities in transferring thoughts from one language into another. But we get additional problems when we try to enter the field of metaphysical thinking through the Lithuanian language.It has such a rich and powerful system of verbal derivatives that it proposes for metaphysical thinking not one, but two sets of basic words: būti-būtis-būtybė and yra-esatis-esinys, each of which is sufficient for interpretation, e.g. De ente et essentia by Thomas Aquinas, so that two "stories" are possible. The discussion concerning problems related to this phenomenon in Lithuanian philosophy has gone on since the Thirties of the last century. The article claims that the latest achievements of Lithuanian grammarians provide new means for a more profound inquiry into the philosophical potency of the Lithuanian verbal derivatives system. It tries to employ them to show how, during an analysis of concrete problems, depending on the character of the metaphysical thinking, one of the mentioned sets of derivatives is more productive than the other. It comes to the conclusion that an inquiry of this sort needs semasiological support. [From the publication]
