A Philosophical Disavowal of Pre-Existence, Temporal Linearity, and the Myth of Ancestral Continuity
I have, through a deliberate act of intellectual severance, relinquished the presupposition that the cosmos, in its vaunted continuity, predated my own emergence in the calendar year 1975. Such a supposition I now consider a relic of mythopoetic thinking—an unconscious concession to the tyranny of ancestral memory and communal fiction. My ontological orientation is thus rooted in an existential singularity: the confluence of temporality, spatiality, and experiential affirmation that defines the phenomenon of my selfhood. The anteriority of the world—that is, the notion of a world persisting independently of and antecedent to my own biological cognition—is to me not merely speculative, but metaphysically irrelevant.
A hypothetical interlocutor, perhaps wounded in their allegiance to filial continuity, might interrogate me with a rebuke: “Do you then efface the actuality of your father? Of your forebears?” To such an appeal, I offer not negation, but a phenomenological clarification: I have witnessed a female entity conducting the functions conventionally ascribed to maternal stewardship, and I have received from a male presence the gestures conventionally decoded as affection and protection. The woman declared the man to be my biological progenitor. This assertion, received through linguistic transmission, became intelligible only within a framework where Biology—capitalized as both science and metaphysical architecture—renders intelligible the phenomenon of ‘relation’ through genomic determinism. I acceded, therefore, not to the truth of parentage, but to the operational syntax of a self-sustaining biological system: a system of codes, reactions, and regulated entropy—my biological shell, or what I term my bio-package.
This package, governed by unseen principles I denominate bionomic forces, sustains itself through a cascade of molecular negotiations striving for a precarious equilibrium termed homeostasis. The system’s internal chemistry, obscure yet sovereign, orchestrates this balance not by volition but through deterministic necessity. The illusion of autonomy—of ‘I-me’ as the agent—is therefore sublated into a deeper recognition that I am not the author of my metabolism; rather, my metabolism is the author of me. To name it ‘my metabolism’ is to commit a linguistic violence, for it is in fact a sovereign actor whose ‘I’ precedes and exceeds my own.
And yet, I am haunted by the irrefutable immediacy of my own awareness—the trembling utterance ‘I-am’. Insofar as I am biologically present to myself, there emerges a field of correlative meanings: entities, objects, atmospheres, and others who resemble me, whom I denominate as Heuma—humanesque beings co-emergent within my phenomenological purview. These do not precede me; they arise contemporaneously with the assertion of my being. Just as the moon and sun acquire visibility and signification only in the light of my sentience, so too does the category of ‘others’ acquire reality only within the locus of my experiential affirmation. Prior to my advent, there was neither moon nor man—only the radical absence that precedes perception.
Hence, I refuse to traffic in the economy of the ‘future’, which I regard as a phantasm engineered by the linearizing impulse of the human narrative instinct. I reject the metaphysics of Life Insurance, a commercial obfuscation of ontological insecurity. My temporal vector is not extended; it is looped, recursive, and contingent solely upon the continuous emergence of the ‘I-am’. If this ontological generator were to cease—if the signal were to extinguish—the entire scaffolding of the cosmos would collapse into an ontological nullity. There would be no locus from which restoration might proceed, for the generator of currency—the existential currency of ‘now’—would have imploded.
This ‘I-am’ is not simply a declarative state; it is the primordial engine of spacetime itself. Space, insofar as it is registered, is but the externalization of interior motion; time, the dialectical pulse of positional alternation within that space. Time and space are not dualities but reverberations of the same ontic vibration. The dipolar movement from experiential node to node constitutes temporality—each pulse a reassertion of the self’s projection into a simulacrum of continuity.
That I exist at all is to me a metaphysical aberration of incalculable mystery. This existence is neither affirmed by logic nor justified by biology; it is, in its essence, an enigma that resists translation. To cease questioning it would suggest a neurological arrest; to persist in questioning it suggests a systemic malfunction—a metabolic misfire, wherein cognition turns cannibalistic upon its own foundations. My questioning is not mine; my thought is not mine; even the language that seeks to encapsulate these dilemmas is alien, foisted upon me by antecedent structures I cannot verify. In truth, I am not thinking; I am being-thought.
Thus, if I say “my metabolism,” I commit a conceptual betrayal, for the possessive pronoun implies a mastery that is illusory. The more precise articulation would be: “Metabolism’s I”—an inversion that grants primacy to the systemic force, allowing the emergent self to be no more than a linguistic ripple, a byproduct, a side-effect of the process that animates and consumes it simultaneously.
Advocatetanmoy: 22nd May 2025
