# Can “existence” be thought without relations? **URL:** \ **Category:** Metaphysics & Epistemology\ **Created:** [March 29, 2026, 3:01am UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/can-existence-be-thought-without-relations/486 "2026-03-29T03:01:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 29
**Author:** ![Wayfarer](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/wayfarer/32/123_2.png) [@Wayfarer](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Wayfarer)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2026, 11:03pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/can-existence-be-thought-without-relations/486/29 "2026-03-30T23:03:00Z")
> [@Jin](#): > > What I’m still trying to understand is whether that assumption is actually necessary, or whether it comes from a certain way of thinking rather than from the nature of existence itself. Well, again - it’s a big topic! It’s the kind of question that motivates whole careers. The natural subject area for this question is ‘the history of ideas’, which is a distinct sub-discipline, usually situated in Cultural Studies or Comparative Religion. You also find those kinds of treatments in sociology, a classic example being Max Weber’s ‘The Spirit of Capitalism and the Protestant Work Ethic’. Such studies consider the geneaology of formative conceptions in society and culture and how they unfold and develop over generations. (I did a BA in Comparative Religion, where this ‘history of ideas’ approach is very much part of the curriculum.) But this, again, is where the contrast between the Indian and the Semitic religions is useful (the Semitic religions being Judaism, Christianity and Islam.) They developed in very separate cultural spheres in the ancient world, and started from very different cultural traditions. The questions they explored and their core assumptions are very different, giving rise to diverse cultural and religious forms. At risk of generalisation, I will say that the Eastern religions have a much more fluid, and less concretized, sense of the nature of Being. Perhaps have a look at my OP, [What the Buddha Didn’t Say.](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/what-the-buddha-didnt-say/242) It addresses this distinction specifically. --- _[View the full topic](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/can-existence-be-thought-without-relations/486)._