Q: Is a being an extremely broad concept encompassing objective and subjective features of reality and existence? ¶
Q: Is a being being added to nothing is only a tautology: being is being? ¶
Q: Is a being also understood as one's "state of being," and hence its common meaning is in the context of human experience? ¶
A: Yes, and with aspects that involve expressions and manifestations coming from an innate "being", or personal character.
Q: Is a being described as Da-sein or being-in-the-world? ¶
Q: Is a being substance? ¶
A: Yes, and St.
Q: Is a being a category of the same thing then there can be neither differences between things nor any change? ¶
Q: Is a being an analogous predication? ¶
Q: Is a being not a genus? ¶
A: Yes, since it is not predicated univocally but only analogically.
Q: Is a being actuated by another really distinct principle? ¶
A: Yes, and the existence.
Q: Is a being also called a "being", though often this usage is limited to entities that have subjectivity? ¶
A: Yes, So broad a notion has, inevitably, been elusive and controversial in the history of philosophy, beginning in Western philosophy with attempts among the pre-Socratics to deploy it intelligibly.
Q: Are beings an illusion upon the flow? ¶
Q: Is a being a being that is being? ¶
Q: Is a being not univocal? ¶
A: Yes, because all beings are unique, each actuated by a unique existence.
Q: Is a being a homogeneous and non-differentiated sphere and the appearance of beings is illusory? ¶
Q: Are beings like? ¶
A: Yes, or analogous to, each other in existing.