Essence vs. Appearance

(movements in the core of the earth will always shape its appearance on the surface)

 Essence vs. Appearance is such a fundamental contradiction in human society that it is taken for granted in some quarters. What do we really know about this fundamental contradiction? I am only discussing this contradiction from a general perspective and to assess how it is manifested in human society. G.W. F. Hegel in the Science of Logic and Karl Marx in the 4 volumes of Capital have had the most influence on this discussion. Hegel and Marx are the two greatest proponents of the dialectic method in the history of philosophy. Hegel acknowledged essence as the objectifying principle behind something or being with appearance being its outward projection.  The contradiction of essence vs. appearance is quite straightforward in the history of human civilization. This is what I want to briefly discuss from a societal perspective and this is where Marx is very helpful. Hegel was a proponent of the idealistic dialectic method and so his method was not readily translatable into the systems that constitute human society. Marx on the other hand reversed Hegel’s dialectic in favour of a more materialistic conception of the dialectic method which he employed in his analysis of the capitalist mode of production. I am just here to generalize from a materialistic perspective while acknowledging the idealistic basis for the dialectic that laid down the principles regarding essence vs. appearance. Hegel also stated that the actuality of the object would make it into an active agent or have its existence justified in some way or the other. I am here focusing on how the realm of appearance has clouded the essence of certain objects in society. This is because the quality of an object is its essence whereas the quantity reflects the appearance of  the many parts that constitute the whole. In society it has become increasingly difficult to grasp how all the parts come together to form the whole. I am here to apply the notion that will explain this contradiction

The Essence

The essence or essential features of an object involve its many components and how they come together. A coming together of various parts normally constitutes the essence of an object which is composed of these various parts. You cannot have the one without the many (No I am not discussing the matrix but the matrix trilogy did adopt this philosophy) because the one or the whole is the content that is comprised of the many. The one along with its many parts constitute the form of a particular object or its essence. The one attracts the many and the many become the one just as the many produce the one that  becomes the many.   Obviously in the materialistic world there are many parts of a whole that also constitute their own wholes. They solidify into their own whole yet they are still  apart of a larger whole. This larger whole may also be just another part of an even greater whole. The universe  is composed of  many galaxies,  the galaxies  are composed of  many solar systems, the many solar systems are composed of planets and the planets are composed of various gaseous and rocky/solid elements. In the case of earth the life organism emerges out of this as the smallest element which is then broken down into its own various parts. In the case of human beings the life force has given way to civilization and then civilization gives way to laws or the many elements that constitute a society and make it function such as the many human individual elements engaged in economic activity. The human individual elements within the context of society also have their own parts that help to constitute the whole of a particular civilization.  In the case of life it is an offspring of the natural elements of earth in conjunction with the sun which powers the system in which the earth resides. Life is the smallest element in the universe but it is still a part of the larger whole we call the universe. Life is obviously important to us as humans because without the necessary natural elements that made it possible we would not have human civilization. These natural elements are greater than us in their physical scope and this is evidenced by the inability of humans to venture very far from earth or our inability to go beyond our own solar system. This means that human civilization is the lowest element on the universal scale. As a result of this progression, however, life forms may be the smallest physically but are also the most advanced.

From a materialistic perspective the universe is therefore a coming together of the many parts that comprise it including the puny life forms on earth. This is the essence of the universe or the essential features of its objective materialization which is comprised of these many parts. All these many parts have their own conception and therefore a relative basis for their own existence which allows them to form their wholes with several parts. The whole=parts=new wholes being formed. It is a progression from the whole object which is then broken up into several parts and these parts become their own wholes. It is this progression that reflects development or growth. The essence is the form that each part assumes as it becomes a whole or a distinct body. This sort of advancement cannot be fathomed without a historical and philosophical approach which documents how a particular part became its own whole. The essence of an object is a part of the telling but it does not explain the reason for such a progression. This explanation comes from an examination of  the subjective elements that interact in order to create new wholes and the parts that comprise these new wholes. The process itself is distinct from the essential features of an object although the essential features form the basis for a particular form of interaction between elements that will lead to a new whole. This interaction takes place within the whole itself or between the several individual parts that constitute the whole. It is their interaction that lead to the creation of a new system or whole. This is the notion or the subjective aspect that is a feature of the objective logic of an objects essence or its essential features.   The essence only shows how these parts come together in the whole but does not explain how the parts become new wholes. That is for another discussion.  

The historical and philosophical approach reveals the origins of a particular object and how it was constituted after breaking off from a preceding whole to become its own entity apart from the dominant whole. While it may remain distinct, however, it still relies on the foundation of a larger whole that supports it. It cannot be divorced from the larger whole although it has assumed its own distinct form.  If we forget the universe and focus on the many nations or cultural groups that form the whole of human civilization then the concept still applies. Although cultures appear so radically different, for instance, you come to realize, with sufficient historical research and current exposure, that humans are not different in their conception. All the various cultural groups developed in a particular manner which was characterized, holistically, by their interaction with the natural elements and how human labour utilized these natural elements. These natural elements also include our own bodies (sports, warfare etc).  The interaction of human labour with the natural elements is the basic origin of our economic systems and this laid the foundation for the growth of capitalism as we know it today. This is the material basis for the growth of human civilizations. Capitalism is the most advanced way of utilizing human labour for the exploitation of the natural elements for the benefit of human civilization.

This interaction with nature  is the core for the cultural basis of many civilizations and became the basis for the philosophical approach that sought to understand the world through enquiry.   Language, artistic representation and communication also helped us to identify these external natural elements for the purpose of conceptualization. Conceptualization however did not explain the essence of an object but described it and made it distinct in the realm of appearance. The philosophical approach of enquiry sought to understand how these concepts came together. This came with the growth of science that further rationalized the many natural elements of world in which we live. Putting the parts together, however, within the context of the whole is the only way to understand the essence of anything. This can only come with historical research and contemporary philosophical enquiry that traces the past origins of something through to the present.  With the growth of labour productivity the whole of universal human society is now composed of many parts. It is the interaction of these parts that become the source of various contradictions. It can only be resolved with a violent coming together. A peaceful coming together is out of the question because that will not lead to change because the many parts will always interact as contradictions without any coming together. The history of universe demonstrates that it is violent clashes that lead to new beginnings. The creation of planets came with the clashing of rocks.  The forces of destruction lead to creation and likewise the forces of creation lead to destruction because all natural elements are finite. Being finite means that you will be destroyed although your existence is representative of creation.

The essence is, therefore, the whole or the object that is comprised of many parts. These many parts form the basis for a certain progression from the whole forming new wholes because of a breakaway from the preceding whole.

The Appearance

The appearance of an object is the outward projection of the essential features of an object. The appearance is the element that is representative of the essential features of an object. The appearance is representative of the many manifestations of an object. The five senses of biological beings corresponds to the realm of appearance. It is how we relate to the essential features of an object. The essential features of an object are projected onto biological beings in the form of appearance and this allows for a certain perception of an object and what it represents. The perception of many individuals is due to the sphere of appearance because they relate to the essential features of an object based on how they react to it from a sensory perspective. When humans became more conscious of their environment due to the conquest of land and economic activity the level of perception also increased because humans also became more aware of the various parts of the whole which was nature and categorized them accordingly. This categorization took on a more religious perspective particularly as nature was seen as a divine element or an element beyond the control of human beings. Once it was beyond the control of human beings then it was divine in its conception. This categorization of the various parts was due to how the many natural elements were presented from a sensory point of view.

The sensory point of view is clearly the most basic form of perception but it is this perception that made some humans aware of the essential features of an object. The perception is therefore tied into appearance and it is clear that if perception is tied into appearance then there must be various perspectives of the same object. This leads to a significant distortion of the object (check Plato’s analogy of the cave) as it stands in its essential form. The realm of appearance does not allow for a significant understanding of the essential features of an object. The realm of appearance does allow for a closer examination of the essential features of an object. When we come into this world we perceive the world in a particular way as we are shaped by how we respond to our external environment. Our response to our external environment is based on how we initially perceive it but that does not mean we understand the essential features of the objects that surround us. Today there are so many objects in the form of commodities and this is due to the extent of industrial production. With so many objects being presented to us in the realm of appearance we will not be able to grapple with the essential features of all. We will, therefore, only assume or perceive our own interpretation without an examination of the essential features of some objects. We can only grapple with how these objects appear to us. When you consider the extent of production under capitalism for instance we are presented with a system that significantly exploits the working class by extracting surplus value/unpaid labour time. A lot of wealth is generated from this kind of production and in the realm of appearance this is known as profit. Profit, according to Marx, is the amount of surplus value added to the total capital advanced for production. In the realm of appearance, however, people perceive that this is the case but they cannot understand the essential features of the object. The members of the working class will perceive that something is wrong when their wages do not increase even as their productivity increases; but the wealth of their owners increase considerably with an increase in the means of production. This contradiction clearly means that the essence of the capitalist system is the exploitation of wage labour. It is the high level of labour productivity of the working class that allows for the significant increase in the amount of wealth of those owners, called capitalists, that do not partake in the working process to any great extent. The great economists such as Karl Marx, David Ricardo, William Petty, Quesnay and Adam Smith are just examples of those that sought to explain the essential features of this system. Marx was the most definitive, in his 4 volumes of Capital, in his assessment of the capitalist system because he grappled significantly with the essential features of the system and how the parts constituted the whole. This template that demonstrated the various essential features of the system cannot be challenged unless someone else seeks to understand the totality of the system instead of just one aspect.

The system is capitalism and the many parts such as the profits of the capitalist, the rent of the landlord and the wages of the working class which represent the main sources of revenue in society. There is also the element that represents constant capital and remains fixed in the production sphere. The revenues operate in the sphere of circulation or the market and it is there where the realm of appearance is manifested for several individuals that come to see money, or the universal equivalent that can be exchanged with every commodity, as the embodiment of wealth. Although the growth in a country’s monetary resources is tied into the level of production or output of that particular nation or the production level of other countries, companies or individuals that provide loans to a particular country. The level of production must be realized in the consumption sphere or in the marketplace or the production sphere will be significantly affected. This means that for the consumption sphere to be increased then production must also be increased in different sectors of the society in order to generate the revenues that will allow for the realization of production. The revenues appear as the appearance of capital to many but they do not grapple with how these revenues are generated from an essential point of view.

The realm of appearance, therefore, is the outward projection of the essential elements of a particular system or whole. As the system of capitalism shows objects normally indicate their presence by some form of emission that represents the outcome of the many processes in the system that lead to this sort of emission. In the capitalist system the appearance takes the form of revenues that circulate in the marketplace. Whereas the essential elements of capitalism are related to the production sphere that allows for the growth in revenues.  The appearance represents only the emissions that take the form of the many parts that comprise the whole. This appearance, therefore, does allow for a perception of an object’s essence but it does not allow for a sufficient understanding of how the many parts comprise the whole as a result of the notion or how the appearance itself is manifested. The whole must first be perceived in the realm of appearance before the essential elements of the whole can be understood. In the case for many people appearance precedes the essence when in reality it is the essence that comes before the appearance.  This is why some individuals become stuck in the realm of appearance and make many assumptions about an object without attempting to understand its essential features or the parts that comprise the whole. The one attracts the many and the many are solidified in the presence of the one. The many also create the presence of the one.  Many people will only come to grips, from an individualistic point of view, with the part they play in a whole while ignoring the other parts. By ignoring the other parts they can only grapple with them based on how they are projected in the realm of appearance. This leads to stereotyping.

The appearance, therefore, represents the essence of the object but does not concretely provide an understanding of the object’s essence. Representation does not translate to actuality or how an object moves or becomes involved with other parts that comprise the whole or how the whole is broken into many parts. Representation is an outward projection but does not necessarily provide for an understanding of an object’s essence or how it moves. Appearance or representation is only an outcome of the core beneath that emitted this superficial element. This is why those elements that exist in the realm of appearance are considered superficial because it only represents or only reflects the essential elements of an object which are so diverse that it is difficult to fathom, by some, in the material world. All they have is the appearance of such objects or their representative form.

Essence vs. Appearance

The contradiction of essence vs. appearance has  become a significant contradiction from a materialistic perspective. This is because from an idealistic basis Hegel saw appearance as merely the outward projection of essence. It does not seem like a significant contradiction in such a case. Appearance normally reflects the essential elements but it does not define them or provide insight into the essential make up of a particular object. Appearance leads to many people having various perceptions of a particular object or event. There are many people that reside primarily in the realm of appearance and this can lead to several false assumptions about a particular object. Conspiracy theories are one of the best examples in the social scene regarding the realm of appearance. A lot of these conspiracy theorists ask a lot of questions but do not examine a particular object from a concrete basis. They only examine objects, events or situations from the perspective of what happened in the realm of appearance. One of the primary reason for this is that in the modern day only a few individuals have access to primary bits of data that could help to explain certain objects, events or situations. This is would explain why some government documents in some national archives can only be seen after a 30 year period. Until that 30 year period it is difficult to gain access to the essential features of a particular object, event or situation and will have to deal in the realm of appearance or perception until all the elements of the essential object or event is made available. In some cases only the perception of certain individuals can provide some insight and with the growth in population of various nation states, economies and the technological apparatus of various societies it is clear that several individuals have a perception regarding certain events. They call these perceptions opinions or beliefs about an essential object. The examination of the essential features of an object or event can only come from a historical based research or philosophical enquiry. Commissions of enquiry are almost a standard in many nation states. This is due to the philosophical tradition that many claim is dead or dying.

It is ironic that the opinions or the perception an individual has about an object or event used to be the foundation of the early societies. We see this with the rise of the great religions where belief was more important than science or philosophical enquiry. Belief without any form of research led to a lot of destruction, low labour productivity and triumphant idealism that choked the progression of human society. Idealism is therefore at the forefront of the earlier societies until the rapid increase in labour productivity which increased output considerably  and wealth generation that came with capitalism made significant inroads into such perceptions. The rise of capitalism has shattered many beliefs regarding the extent that humans can take control of their destiny. Prior to the rise of capitalism many people believed only in the pie in the sky as they were still tied to the dominant physical element of  nature. Capitalism has demonstrated that with a high work ethic humans can increase their own prosperity without much regard for religious belief. Capitalism also grew hand in hand with scientific development that also increased the extent of it s applicability due to the increase in labour productivity that is one of the primary features of capitalism. An increase in labour productivity increased the worth of the sciences to society as people needed to make sure that their endeavours would not be futile due to mere perception or belief that can condemn and destroy just as much as it promotes and would be more certain of success. This now applies to most spheres of life. A lot of people want to be certain of the facts before they judge. Grappling with the facts means that one is grappling with the essence or essential features of an object or event.

The realm of appearance associated with belief, opinion or perception about  essence or the essential features of an object or situation, still predominates for many individuals despite the rapid advances of technology and science. This can also be yet another reflection of the class struggle where knowledge is controlled by a certain sector of society instead of being evenly distributed. The majority of the working class that rely primarily on their labour in order to survive and have no regard to how this technology is actually created although they know how it works or how the pieces fit. Currently the realm of appearance exists or is concentrated in many spheres such as religion,  academic spheres that are ideologically biased, the arts and many aspects of the media that deal only with breaking news or emissions from the essential object or event. The religious groups, the ideologically biased academic sphere, some aspects of the arts and some aspects of the media become the outlets for the perception of many individuals. There are a wealth of perceptions out there and many of them are not definitive. Democracy thrives on such perceptions and this explains why the implementation of certain policies is difficult because everyone has to be taken into account. This adds credence to the whole of society and its many parts. If the many parts are not considered it is possible that some of these parts will breakaway or be repulsed from the whole. Whether a democracy or a tyranny effective governance is only effective once everyone is taken into account or accounted for. If this is based on only perception, however, it will not necessarily solve the problems of society because the core moves independently of the perceptions of individuals in society.

The realm of appearance and the realm of essence therefore exist in tandem because it is clear that the essential elements move or progress regardless of the opinions of others and its appearance continually manifests in the realm of appearance. Changes at the core eventually affect the realm of appearance. The realm of appearance always lags behind and this still encourages the idealistic perceptions or those individuals that remain attached to a former way of doing things. This is one of the downsides of an idealistic approach because it elevates the realm of appearance to a point where the movement of the essential features are disregarded to some extent. The idealistic way is shattered when a crisis erupts. The eruption of various forms of crisis (political, economic or societal) in the social sphere always shatteres the idealistic mould that held sway and this violent eruption or destructive element forces a reconsideration or reexamination of the essential features of an object. When this happens then a new creative force emerges that will now emerge from an essential basis. The former idealistic measure is no more but it will then reemerge in the realm of appearance with the expansion of the new creative force at the core. In the capitalist economic sphere credit/debt can be seen as a the idealistic element that believes in  a new form of progress whereas in a crisis the credit/debt becomes bad because the essential elements cease to function as a creative force and become destructive. This credit/debt also becomes bad. This destruction, however, will lead to a new form or creative force. It is because of this contradiction of essence vs. appearance that the world seems to run smoothly because of lies that maintain a certain appearance to some elements but when the truth emerges, regarding a particular element, it is regarded as revolutionary and very disruptive. The liberation of society will only occur when society operates solely on the basis  of truth or in the  continual acknowledgement of the essential features of a particular object or event.

This concludes my basic discussion of essence vs. appearance. This contradiction has assumed significant proportions in the 21^st century. Things are never what they seem will eventually be become the basis for the interaction between people, nation states, companies etc. At this point human societies exist in a space where the realm of appearance or perception is continuously being challenged until the point where only the truth prevails over lies that only maintain the appearance of a particular element. Maintaining the appearance of an element with lies and idealism is dangerous particularly with the constant eruptions that occur in the essential sphere or at the core. These constant eruptions are very surprising because of the idealism that resides in the realm of appearances. A constant update of the happenings at the essential core lays the basis for complete liberation. Hanging on to past ideals with no regard to the current environment can only end in destruction or dire poverty.