#ontology of
#time-qualified-objects
#Ingarden
#StudiaPhilosophica #1935

/4
and thus we find (only in chapter V), i.e., in the last 11 pages of this 78 pages paper a wealth of imop noteworthy #ontological observations and considerations wrt three kinds of "zeitbestimmte, individuelle, seinsautonome Gegenstände"
viz.
Type I:
"Zeitgegenstände" [temporal objects],
dividing into "Vorgänge" [processes] and "Ereignisse" [events]
Type II
"in der Zeit seiende Gegenstände" [objects existing in time]

I'm not a specialist wrt Ingarden's work nor wrt its reception, but it seems to me that this 1934 written and 1935 l.c. published work has been widely overloooked, but imhop deserved due attention.

#ontology of
#time-qualified-objects
#Ingarden
#StudiaPhilosophica #1935

/3
Ingarden here tries to describe esp. a 'general structure'[formale Aufbau] of say every day macroscopic 'objects of discourse', anticipating them terminologically as "zeitbestimmte, individuelle, seinsautonome Gegenstände" [time-qualified, individual, autonomously existing objects]. And in the light of rather 90 years of "analytical philosophy" later
[ having sharpened our reservations wrt say "Seinsbestimmungen"]
this verbal packaging seems, as said above, unfortunate. But what (from my p.o.v.) Ingarden wants to draw attention to, is kind of an #ontological #generalization of what nowadays in #philbio is habitually discussed under the heading of #homeostatic systems/processes/objects.
#autopoiesis #homeostasis

#ontology of
#time-qualified-objects
#Ingarden
#StudiaPhilosophica #1935

/2
well, it's perhaps not unusual in #philosophy, that the brilliance of an epochal work quite automatically, though undeservedly, distracts attention from other valuable intellectual work in the immediate "neighbourhood" . the more, when its neglection is enforced by (from a current p.o.v) somewhat unfortunate verbal packaging.
and this is, what imop happened to Roman #Ingarden's "Vom formalen Aufbau des individuellen Gegenstandes" [Studia Philosophica, vol.1]