A philosophical question about Pokémon

[Queen Cynthia]

Recently a quite philosophical thought has crossed my mind which I now want to present and discuss with you:


Pokémon or Pocket Monsters - what does this name imply?

It expresses that there are creatures which are caught with and carried around in balls which again can be put into one´s pocket (therefore Pocket + Monsters)

BUT: Considering the fact that the term "Pokémon" is a human invention we have to assume that this name has been being assigned to our well-known monsters since the point of time when humankind was created or, to speak more precisely, when the first Pokéball was inventend.

The Anime asserts that Pokemon and humans have been living together since the beginning of their being and Pokéballs have been existing since the ancient times, but it also points out that some Pokemon had already been existing before mankind appeared on earth, for example the Pokemon of Land Sea and Sky, Groudon, Kyogre and Rayquaza, the Pokemon of Time and Space, Dialga and Palkia, furthermore Giratina, Uxie, Mesprit and Azelf and finally Arceus.

And this leads us to the crucial topic:
->As we can´t deny that there were Pokémon existing before humans, what term they can be described with?
->Can they be named "Pocket Monsters" altough Pokeballs and humans who would use these Pokeballs weren´t existing yet in those days?
And to sum it up:
->What is their real, original, PURE name? A name which is almost metaphysical and not spoilt by the human system of language


The following thoughts could serve as a kind of orientation:
Are those questions above of any relevance, in case humans suject the whole world to their system of expressions and imaginations? Or, like Plato would object, are their certain unchangeable, eternal truths which mirror themselves in the immanent here and now?
The latter would mean that there is an actual pure and original expression for "Pokemon". Will we ever be capable of approaching this name?

 

[The Outrage]

Whose to say the Pokeball wasn't anmed after the humans coined the term Pokemon. Its as if you are implying something along the lines of a Television remote being called a TV remote before the TV was ever called the TV.

As for your question:
What is their real, original, PURE name? A name which is almost metaphysical and not spoilt by the human system of language

First of all, what is a "name" really. It is nothing more than a label in which one uses to identify physical objects or ideas. Pokemon, Pocket Monsters, Pogeymanz, though there are many ways of reffering to this idea or being of "Pokemon" it does not change the being or idea itself.

And to ask for a "name which is almost metaphysical and not spoilt by the human system of language" is impossible. The concept of "name" after all is a human concept, therefore there cannot be a name not spoilt by the human system of language.

Even if Pokemon had a concept of a name, that too would be spoilt by their Pokemon system of language, and that name would be different for each species and each region these Pokemon come from. If you are looking for the "pureness" of the idea of Pokemon, then all physical ties to this world have to be severed, including the concept of identification. You cannot get to the pure concept of anything being tied down to ideas of our physical realm.

 

[Habunake]

You do realize that's impossible since, you know, these are manmade cartoon characters?

Have no clue how the fuck you find a METAPHYSICAL name for that.

 

[The Outrage]

With that attitude that beats the whole purpose of this Pokemon World forum doesn't it :/

 

[Habunake]

No, I mean there are some things you can speculate on, but I really can't think of anything you can say here.

 

[Queen Cynthia]

ok perhaps the expression "pure metapyhsical name" was misleading!
I should call them "principles" or "objects"
Confer what I stated above: "Or, like Plato would object, are their certain unchangeable, eternal truths which mirror themselves in the immanent here and now? "
According to Plato everything that seems real to us is actually a copy and representative of an eternal principle /truth. And these are divided form our world by a so-called "Great Line of Being"

You have to know I´m attending a lecture on Metaphysics during my studies. Although it´s just for fun and aimed only for my personal education, it´s nevertheless very instructional and so the idea crossed my mind to apply this knowledge to a topic about Pokémon

 

[Cheesus Is Lord]

Even Plato's idealistic forms were referred to by a human name, such as "love" or "truth". These names are tainted by the ideas of those using them and are also not pure. As "L" said, there is no way to find a pure name, in this sense. You can speak of what the Platonic ideal of Pokemon would be, but you can't name it or even truly understand it without corrupting it in some way with your real-world experience.

Although maybe I should have said "fantasy world" since Pokemon isn't actually real ^^;;

 

[Queen Cynthia]

You can speak of what the Platonic ideal of Pokemon would be, but you can't name it or even truly understand it without corrupting it in some way with your real-world experience.

There seem to be a high degree of truth in your words.
So let´s proclaim a new aim:

Can we perhaps approach this pure, ideal primal name of Pokémon?

 

[NoDontRapeMeOMG]

Recently a quite philosophical thought has crossed my mind which I now want to present and discuss with you:


Pokémon or Pocket Monsters - what does this name imply?

It expresses that there are creatures which are caught with and carried around in balls which again can be put into one´s pocket (therefore Pocket + Monsters)

BUT: Considering the fact that the term "Pokémon" is a human invention we have to assume that this name has been being assigned to our well-known monsters since the point of time when humankind was created or, to speak more precisely, when the first Pokéball was inventend.

The Anime asserts that Pokemon and humans have been living together since the beginning of their being and Pokéballs have been existing since the ancient times, but it also points out that some Pokemon had already been existing before mankind appeared on earth, for example the Pokemon of Land Sea and Sky, Groudon, Kyogre and Rayquaza, the Pokemon of Time and Space, Dialga and Palkia, furthermore Giratina, Uxie, Mesprit and Azelf and finally Arceus.

And this leads us to the crucial topic:
->As we can´t deny that there were Pokémon existing before humans, what term they can be described with?
->Can they be named "Pocket Monsters" altough Pokeballs and humans who would use these Pokeballs weren´t existing yet in those days?
And to sum it up:
->What is their real, original, PURE name? A name which is almost metaphysical and not spoilt by the human system of language


The following thoughts could serve as a kind of orientation:
Are those questions above of any relevance, in case humans suject the whole world to their system of expressions and imaginations? Or, like Plato would object, are their certain unchangeable, eternal truths which mirror themselves in the immanent here and now?
The latter would mean that there is an actual pure and original expression for "Pokemon". Will we ever be capable of approaching this name?

What's so philosophical about this question? It's a legitimate question, yes, but hardly a philosophical one.

The basis of this question pretty much lies in the idea that Pokemon have a functioning language, with unique words, grammar and such, which would give them the capacity to name themselves. Sounds good from the surface, but it has more than a few holes. First, yes, it has been made abundantly clear that Pokemon are capable of communication both among themselves and with humans, but this doesn't necessarily imply the existence of a language. Nearly all Pokemon-human communications occur through the use of psychic telepathy, where the Pokemon will broadcast its thought into the human's mind, which wouldn't need any languages, and even Pokemon-Pokemon communication never seemed to lingual to me. More like how dolphins communicate, using sounds and such.

Also, Pokemon is an umbrella term for hundreds, possibly thousands, of different species inhabiting the same planet. It is hard for me to see all these different species congregating to make such an umbrella name for themselves, when most of them probably don't even consider each other to be in the same family, and more than a few of them have a predator-prey relationship going on.

So in short, no, I don't believe there is a "pure" name for the Pokemons.