Second Short Answer

2. explain the distinction between the two realities -- the latent and the manifest-- in ortega's thought and how these realities are lived within "my life".

[[LAURA]]

     The distinction between the two realities (the latent and the manifest) is brought about in Ortega’s re-evaluation of the Cartesian theory.


     If it is unquestionable that the appearance of thoughts exists, there must be something latent within that reality: ‘latent’ being that ‘which appears in that appearance, which sustains it and which it truly is.’ The latent reality I call the “I”, the self, my real self I do not see, it is not evident to me and must therefore be reached through a conclusion (‘hence’): “I think, hence I exist”. But Ortega asks, ‘who is the “I” which exists?’ It is the thing. The ‘I’ is not thought, but a thing of which thought is an attribute, or a manifestation. The “I” is the latent, it is not thought. Thought is the manifestation of this thing which is the “I”.


So, instead of “I think therefore I exist” (“In the same phrase Descartes discovers a new world for us, he withdraws it from us and annuls it.”) Ortega says, “I exist, therefore I think.” The thought and the self are not one and the same thing. Thought, in order to exist, needs nothing.


     In terms of ‘my life,’ I (the latent) who think (the manifest) and the world about which I think also exists; the one exists with the other, having no possible separation between them (‘I exist for the world and the world exists for me) If there were no things to be seen, thought about or imagined, I would not see think or imagine (the manifest); that is to say I would not exist. “My Life” is my interaction and preoccupation with myself in the world.


     Therefore the basic and undeniable fact is not my existence, but my coexistence with the world. My life is occupying myself (the latent) with the world, thinking about (the manifest) and being open to the world.

[[/LAURA]]