We may understand “Being as such” in a predominantly Aristotelian manner, that is, as the ultimate “third term” (to put it crudely). In monotheist metaphysics, this ultimate “Being” is “God”, although due to the nature of such inquiries, it is often denied that this is an entity with a “context” pre-existing and establishing it; thus we have a very strong and (I believe) required apophatic element in monotheist metaphysics, as negative approaches to divinity are (I think) required for deities as such, considering their ultimate transcendence.
Certain Theses on the “non-thirdness” of Being
Certain Theses on the “non-thirdness” of…
Certain Theses on the “non-thirdness” of Being
We may understand “Being as such” in a predominantly Aristotelian manner, that is, as the ultimate “third term” (to put it crudely). In monotheist metaphysics, this ultimate “Being” is “God”, although due to the nature of such inquiries, it is often denied that this is an entity with a “context” pre-existing and establishing it; thus we have a very strong and (I believe) required apophatic element in monotheist metaphysics, as negative approaches to divinity are (I think) required for deities as such, considering their ultimate transcendence.