Red Alert!              

          The IS-WORD

     is an Ontological Icon!

                   BUT IT CAN SOMETIMES BE QUITE EXPLOSIVE IN ITS POWER.

The red 'IS ALERT' button flashes insistently. Instinctively I flick the safety-switch and nervously ease myself backward in my chair. The blast-proof screen slides down silently. I mop my brow and stare through the translucent protective shield. Action is clearly required.

This letter bomb needs immediate de-activation, for if it explodes, it could set off a chain-reaction of misunderstanding that could wreak untold damage in greater society. Worse still, if this verbal virus escapes onto the Internet, it could infect the minds of millions. There is no escape, it has got to be neutralised, for apart from the personal damage I would sustain, a percussion could unravel the work of centuries of patient philosophical and linguistic explanation. The life’s work of thousands would be invalidated by the confused ramblings of a long dead Nazi German academic.

As I slip my arms into the protective mail-clad sleeves of the remote manipulation gloves, I think of the countless thousands of thinkers who will be forced to withdraw philosophical and linguistic discoveries by this meddling German. Did those philosophers of old burn at the stake, drown on ducking stool for nothing? My wife trembles at the back of the room, a cushion held protectively near her face. Recalling the millions tortured and maimed in the name of fascistic mysticism, I gingerly extend the claws of the artificial hands and carefully probe the string of text. I glance round nervously. 'Where are the children?' I grunt. 'It's OK, my wife whispers, 'they're in the garden playing in the sand-box.'

After a few minutes, my patience is rewarded for I manage to grip the explosive cathexis. Delicately I withdraw the word 'BEING' from its textual matrix - a few more spine-chilling moments of breathless concentration, and the explosive slides out of its expressional entablature. I gasp - it was ingeniously contrived. Now that the immediate danger is over I can examine the alphabetical elements and its mould of lexical phrasework in detail. The outer shell of words was obviously designed to fragment on detonation, projecting idiomatic and discombobulatory existential shrapnel in all directions. I revolve the word on the screen and observe the carapace from different angles.

It is then the most fiendish aspect of the device becomes apparent. The exterior shell had been coated with an insidious adhesive.

It comes to me in a flash -

THE IDEA WAS MEANT TO STICK!

I think of the horror of the full violence of the explosion on an unsuspecting population. Worse still, the damage it would inflict the mind of a trusting child. The effect on a teenager discovering a cock-and-bull story like this would be horrific. The child might run around amongst its little friends, fragments of Heideggerianism sticking to its garments, infecting all that it met and brushed against. Aside from the long-lasting mental damage that the detonation would inflict on an under-developed mind, it would embed fragments of untruth and befuddlement that would impact deep into innocent psyches.

'These bombs get more cunning with every day that passes - first it was nail-bombs, then it was pipe bombs, now they produce Heideggerian BEING -bombs.

Slowly I pour my partner a cup of coffee and tidy the papers on my desk. 'It's sad that obfuscational rhetoric like this is still about in cyberspace, I say. What happened to Huxley's definition of the ideal mental attitude - that of 'amused cynicism?'

'Still,' I reflect, 'at least we won't be contaminated personally - we're far too street-wise for that.' I pause. 'But what about the kids?' Clare asks. I nod in agreement and reach for the telephone - 'Get me the Government - The Department of Education,' I drawl, 'We need to issue a prophylactic Heideggerian ’'BEING-word-alert.'

‘Wait, please wait,’ says my wife pleadingly, as she presses the phone back onto its cradle cutting off my contact – ‘before you contact them and register a complaint, tell me what it’s all about – I want to understand all about this ‘'BEING’ business and the damage it wreaks?’

‘OK,’ I smile indulgently, you go and make another cup of tea while I read the rest of my e-mail – when you get back we’ll look at this Heideggerian ‘’'BEING’ situation in more detail.

Together we sip our tea.

‘OK then,’ says Clare after a pause, ‘so what about the dreaded “'BEING” word?’

‘It’s just an icon,’ I reply.

'Alright, c’mon, what do you mean an “icon,” I hope I haven’t got to drag it out of you?’

‘The word ‘IS’ (which is an insidious variant or mutation of the 'Being- Bomb') and the idea it moves provides a ‘shortcut’ – an ‘icon’ which takes us to a higher level of understanding of the nature and condition of certain aspects of people and things and ideas included in the statement,’ I say.

‘If you click the ‘IS ’icon it mentally acts like a macro or instruction in your brain that results in a series of commands which open a drop down page of further information, or a book of hints as to textual or verbal meaning, usually of the subject and/or predicate in a statement.’

‘Oh great!’ says my wife excitedly, ‘can I design a new icon darling, to replace that boring little ‘IS’ word? How about a navy blue disc to denote the cosmos and two interlocking gold rings surrounded by a constellation of tiny silver stars to depict the atomic structure of all things that exist?’

I glance again at the screen and watch the tiny ‘IS’ word squirming helplessly, held in the electronic grip of my computer programme.

‘You’ve just reminded me of a strange fact I say, ‘Heidegger doesn’t use the word ‘thing’ in the whole of his book ‘Being and Time.’

‘No,’ I say after a moments reflection – our new icon will be nothing fancy – simply a little upward pointing arrow like this ^ as our icon is meant to denote ‘the present.’

Clare looks at me quizzically, ‘what do you mean, “the present,” she intones, ‘How is ‘IS’the present?’

‘Look,’ I reply brushing some toast-crumbs from my sleeve, ‘look at this sentence.’

I type the words, “The cup ^ dirty,” on the screen, at the same time pointing to Cameron’s teacup that stands on the table, still bearing the marks of his grubby little fingers. Quickly I move away from the desk and motion to Clare to take my place – ‘Go on darling – click on the chevron icon.’

My wife clicks the mouse button and cries out excitedly – ‘Look!’ she splutters, ‘See, there’s a lot of text on the screen – what does it say?’

I put on my glasses and lean nearer to the screen and read:

‘The cup is a small open container usually used for drinking. At this moment in time the present state of the object exhibits well known characteristics which indicate that it is in a dirty condition meaning it is soiled and is therefore capable of spreading pollution or contamination.’

‘Wow!’ says Clare, ‘I never realised that that is what to the little word‘IS’ does – I understand now – it acts as shortcut to a hidden’ arcanum of the present,’ that is available inside our head or somebody else’s head if they are willing for inspection at any time. ‘But where does that icon really reside and where is the concealed unspoken information stored? She questions.

‘In your mind,’ I say smiling, or in the mind of another. Whenever you are not sure of what someone says to you, simply click your own ‘IS’ icon – which takes you straight to ‘your analytical memory programme, if you don’t find what you are looking for in order to clarify their statement, you can ask their permission to click their icon button so that you can compare you data with theirs – that is of course if they are willing for you to read their collection.’

‘How do you click their ‘IS’ icon? Clare asks with genuine interest.

‘’You ask them what they mean.’ I say.

I take up my position at the keyboard once more.

‘You see most people don’t need to regurgitate all that descriptive information about what is a cup and what is meant by dirty – so we use the little word ‘IS’ as a substitute to stand-in and replace needlessly spoken information which both participants in the conversation are well aware of from experience. It is only when we are unclear about the import of ideas that we need to click the ‘is’ icon and summon up more data,’ I pronounce finally.

The ‘IS’ icon is superbly efficient at the propagation of data, and when some people maintain that the generation of data is only the province of science in its ceaseless questioning of beings, they are terribly wrong, for the individual human being is vitally interested in maximizing the acquisition of information for his or her own sake. They are also in error when they asseverate that 'Being' is exactly nothing to the sciences, for all of the sciences are or at least claim to be working for the betterment, advancement and benefit of humanity, (and for some at least,) the flora and fauna of our planet - and necessarily so.

Clare shrugs, ‘but at school they told us it was sometimes used as a copula, used with an adjective or a predicate noun?’

‘That may be true,’ I say, ‘but the copuletic use does not render it empty of hidden meaning – it provides merely another grammatical or semantic method of describing the word in a certain textual or syllabical relationship. In other words it does not alter the dynamic relationship between the idea projected by the word ‘is’ in its raison d'etre role which points to additional information.’

‘What’s going to happen to poor old Heidegger’s ‘isnesses' and 'beingnesses' and 'will-be-nesses' and all those other strange confections?’ Clare murmurs half to herself.

‘They’ll still need those strange neologisms when they need to discuss Heidegger’s work,’ I answer, ‘though I think that my new theory will blow all that out of the water.’

Clare looks at me with her eyes wide with incredulity, ‘You are not seriously suggesting that this new idea of yours is going to supplant Heideggerian theory of 'Being' are you?’ Her mouth is contorted somewhere between a grin and a disbelieving scowl.

I smile and lean back in my swivel chair and swing around to face her. ‘Look I say, I’ve never come across this idea about role of ‘the verb to be’ anywhere else in any books or literature that I’ve read. I plan to send my paper to a philosophical magazine to see if they will publish it – failing that if I post it on the Heidegger list then at least the posting will be time stamped and marked as copyright.’ It may supervene upon Heidegger but it won’t supplement his work.’

‘You cheeky sod!’ Says Clare.

‘I’m only horsing around,’ I respond with a laugh.

Hmmmm! She intones raising her brows.

I look out of the window and watch a neighbour’s dog as it lifts its leg and urinates over Cameron’s bike.

‘There never was any being and beings all along,’ I say, Heidegger simply selected the wrong words to describe his confusions. Instead of ‘isness’ he should have chosen the words: ‘existential modality’, that is where he made his error, instead of the word ‘beings’ which sounds incredibly clumsy and has an obvious ring of fiction about it when applied to stones and bicycle pumps, he should have used the words ‘entities,’ which is a perfectly respectable and suitable word with which to carry across the idea of inanimate objects. He must think mankind is stupid if he thinks that there is a basic error because human language didn’t come up with the word ‘isness.’ – the language part of the brain has a craving, an appetite, or great desire for cognitive tidiness, and John Doe knows for sure that the word ‘isness’ is phoney from the ‘feel’ of it, without having any particular linguistic training. Go on,’ I joke, hit the word ‘isness’ with my magic metaphysical hammer and hear the dull thud instead of the clear ringing bell sound – it’s a dud.’

‘Clare smiles indulgently, ‘Why shouldn’t the word ‘is’ get a cute little coda like the word ‘freshness’ or ‘ illness?’ she queried.

‘Simply because the coda 'ness' confers a state or modality - freshness is a word to describe the property of an entity of being pure and ‘fresh,’ as if newly made, while ‘is’ has no tangible attribute of anything, for it is merely a device for pointing to the essential and distinguishing attributes of some-thing or some-one other. What I have done is to identify the real role of the various representations of the verb to be and taken away Heidegger’s favourite ‘playword,’ or 'ontological crutch and replaced it with the term that he should have used all along – the words ‘existential modality.’

My wife frowns and smooths back the errant strands of blonde hair that have fallen across her forehead – ‘You still haven’t explained about ‘existence’ she laughs – are you sure this isn’t all a big joke darling?’ ‘I glance up at her quickly, ‘No I say without a smile, I’m perfectly serious - 'Existence doesn't exist!

‘Go on then tell me what ‘Being’ is.’

‘It’s simple,’ I say, just click on the ‘is’ icon in your mind and tell me what the read-out tells you.’

‘But I haven’t got an ‘is’ icon in my mind!’ she protests.

‘Oh yes you have,’ I retort, ‘everybody’s got an ‘is’ icon in their mind, you’ve just proved it by using the word ‘is’ when you generated your question. If you discover that you haven’t got the relevant data in your experiential bank then you have to ask me to press my ‘is’ enquiry button.’

‘OK then clever-clogs,’ says Clare who is plainly running out of patience, ‘get on with it and click the word 'BEING' on your 'is - icon.’

‘Right here goes,’ I say, at the same time pressing my ‘is’ button.

‘Lo and behold! Here it comes!' I say as my memory bank spews out the additional tabular matter – “Everything that exists anywhere,” Being or occurring in fact or actuality; having verified existence; not illusory. The condition or STATE of living or being alive, by humans or animals or bacteria, viruses etc in which they are vitalised by the spark, which separates us from the not living. A constellation of energy atoms, molecules in a certain pattern or form imbued with aliveness - which I call aliveness in all life-forms including the most primitive forms or vegetable life.’

I say that ‘Being’ is a state, which unlike the states of 'crying' or 'running' is an invariant, persistent in occurrence and unvarying in nature - one 'is' or one 'isn't. There are no different states or stages in being alive - one is either 'alive' or one is 'dead.' ‘Problems of interaction with other humans who share the individual's 'window of life,' are sociological, political, medical, linguistic and scientific ones etc, which are to do with living out their span of life during the enjoyment of the brief state of ‘Being’ which are not the concern of the philosopher who is occupied with the question of asking the question – “What is Being?”

Existing is the FACT of existing by any object including man as a living body or as a corpse in the universe including stones the fact of being present rather than absent which I call existing or being in a state of existence. The how (and possibly the why,) of being? The reason for, and the origin of existence. (Creation versus big-bang etc) The why of the condition or the FACT and the STATE of living or being alive, by humans or animals or bacteria, viruses etc, whether it has some teleological significance or no. Whether it is a cold, unthinking, uncaring nothingness driven only by the engine of physics or otherwise – all these considerations are for the attention of scientists and theologians as well as philosophers.

Some Heideggerians have claimed that Heidegger is not concerned with ‘Being’ as an enquiry into what it like to be alive and to experience the interaction with the other inhabitants of our planet and that the things that confront us in our cosmic environment is not a Heideggerian concern. I reject this suggestion, for the first three parts of Being and Time are wholly concerned with the conduct of his young German students in relation to the Reich and the movement.’

‘Oh don’t go on any more darling I can hear Marius crying – can we continue this discussion tomorrow after I’ve been to the hairdressers?’

‘OK babe,’ I reply, ‘I’ll send this of to the list anyway as it is, I can always add to it and tidy it up later. I’ve got ideas for a three word system to dispense with the blasted verb to be completely in all its cases and in all languages,’ I say gloatingly.

‘What was that darling… ‘ Clare’s voice trails off in the distance