Ravaisson as a Philosopher of Chemistry

In my M.A dissertation project I highlighted the fact that Schelling and Ravaisson had strong parallels insofar as they were both philosophers of chemistry. Unfortunately I did not have room to explore this fully, but I will explain the why I think it is important to highlight this aspect.
In what sense does Ravaisson use chemistry in Of Habit? In Chapter 1 he discusses existence, simply as existence. Every body, or thing that exists, every extended mobile or element, persists in its movement and in its own self-preservation as such a being. However Ravaisson distinguishes between these lower levels of beings or simple bodies against that which has a real existence where habit can take root. Habit for him can only occur when there is a unity, an identity. What brings about the particular entities and forms we see in the world is determined or created by the 'synthesis of elements: from external union in space to the most intimate combinations, from the mechanical synthesis of gravity and molecular attraction to the deepest synthesis of chemical activities.' (pg. 27). These processes constitute/create the world and all its discrete entities up to the most complex bodies. What is important is that he uses the term elements to account for such a process. These elements form the basis of everything and out of them something new is created. But what are these elements? I would argue that the term element itself is not given a concrete definition or explained adequately by Ravaisson, however the three processes such elements go through are. 'But, in the whole of this primary realm of nature, either the elements that come together, in coming together, change only the relations between themselves; or they reciprocally annul each other in balancing each other out; or they are transformed into a common result, different to the elements. The first of these three degrees is mechanical union; the second, physical union (of, for example, two electricities); the third, chemical union or combination.' These elements then are prior to the processes they undergo, and they only undergo three such processes - mechanical (gravity, laws of attraction), physical, or chemical. It is only with the introduction of chemistry that these elements no longer remain just what they are, but differentiate into something new, something more than the elemental level. Chemistry is the active process that transforms or creates the transition from the elemental to actual entities or extended beings in space/time. This transition, this passing from the elemental to existence cannot itself be explained or seen according to Ravaisson. The processes that occur do so outside of measurable time, 'between what could be and what is, we see no milieu, no interval; there is an immediate passage from potentiality to actuality.' The activity of the process is spontaneous and immediate, like a flash of lightening, as it passes from this underlying potential to what is actual - what exists. This movement cannot be charted or followed, it just happens. 'The immediate realization of their potentialities' (the basic elements that form existence) 'in a single actuality is that all the differences of the constitutive parts disappear in the uniformity of the whole; mechanical, physical or chemical, the synthesis is perfectly homogenous.' The elemental level, the differing degrees or intensities of these processes is flattened out or eliminated as soon as a unified, identifiable being is created out of the interaction of such elements, so much so that the process itself becomes homogenous and no real identificable element can be found to be the underlying cause to such processes. The actuality of the created being overrides the potentiality, disguises or destroys it. All that then exists is the product itself, the process has disappeared. Homogeneity exists because there is no difference in time as what passes from the potential (of the elements) to the actual (what exists/discrete entities). This transition cannot be seen or fully explained except with reference to chemistry. The elements themselves are not identifiable or locatable prior to such chemical processes. In effect it could be argued that Ravaisson has a conception of an indeterminate chaos of elements, outside space-time, an abyss replete with virtualities and potentialities that are waiting to be determined into concrete forms through one of three processes, one of which is successful in creating something other than it.

A return back to blogging. Some notes and ideas...

The beginnings of well thought out principles of existence, life and what it means to be. These remarks are only outlines of a beginning in the style of John Fowles aphorisms...

Where are we? This situation is not that and not there, but here right now in this moment. Has it a master? No, we must master it.

All that exists is, by existing and by not being the only existent is an individual.

Affirmation is negation

We are a living contradiction. Is self-contradiction a logical possibility?

Emptiness higher up than nihility? Delving into absolute nothingness.

Reflection a constant doubling.

Feeling before thinking. 

Law is the supposed organising principle and chaos the disorganized destructive one. The two in play constitute existence. Chaos is wonderful – not purely destructive but creative allowing new forms of organization.

Seriousness is a form of sincerity. To be sincere is not to joke, but to offer something real and authentic. To be sincere is to be truthful, therefore seriousness is a display of truth.

Seriousness is one of the greatest forms of authenticity. It is not possible to be inauthentically serious. A display or mask of seriousness always carries with it a laugh inside the head of the one who tries to be seriousness.

Integrity. What is integrity? A true self.

Your being only comes from your actions.

Space is the universal language of the human race.

Seriousness is looked down upon, it is not popular. To be seriousness makes others uncomfortable. It can be a form of coldness, a detachment and distancing from the trivia and unsubstantialalities that form so much of modern life.

Eroticism is a breaking of a taboo, a crossing of a boundary psychologically or personally in moral terms.

Sex is the motivating desire of all things.

All reciprocal love is selfish. It is love of oneself through the eyes and mind of another. It is love of a favourable opinion of another upon oneself; it i iion of another upon oneself. reign to oneself is absents and mind of another. It is love of the opinion of another upon oneses pure self-involvement and self-glorification. The other as an unknown separate entity entirely different and foreign to oneself is absent. All that matters is the reflection.

A lack is the lack of something but that lack itself is that which is most full and excessive.

To like others minimally and with the least effort is easy, but to like others for what they are is hard.

To like others at all is hard.

The older one gets, the older one feels. 25 shows signs of weariness.