Figure out some differences between Being as Essence and Being as Esse.

The distinction between Being as Essence and Being as Esse is rooted in philosophical discussions about the nature of existence and being. These concepts are explored in various philosophical traditions, including scholastic metaphysics and existentialist philosophy.

1. Being as Essence:

   • Scholastic Influence: The idea of Being as Essence is particularly prominent in scholastic metaphysics, influenced by thinkers like Thomas Aquinas. Essence refers to the inherent nature or core attributes that define a thing. In this context, being is understood as the instantiation of a particular essence.
   • Universal and General: Being as Essence involves a more universal and general understanding of existence. It emphasizes the essential qualities that entities share within their respective categories or kinds.

2. Being as Esse:

   • Existentialist Perspective: The concept of Being as Esse is often associated with existentialist philosophy, notably championed by Jean-Paul Sartre. Esse, in Latin, translates to "to be" or "existence." Being as Esse focuses on existence as an act or dynamic process rather than an abstract essence.
   • Individual and Concrete: Being as Esse is more individual and concrete. It underscores the uniqueness and singularity of each entity's existence. For existentialists, existence precedes essence, highlighting the idea that individuals define themselves through their actions and choices.

3. Relationship with Existentialism:

   • Being as Essence: This concept aligns with a more traditional and essentialist understanding of being, where the essence of a thing precedes and defines its existence. It may be associated with a deterministic view of identity.
   • Being as Esse: Existentialism challenges essentialism, emphasizing the subjective and individual nature of existence. Being as Esse implies that individuals create their essence through their choices and actions, embracing a more existential freedom.

4. Philosophical Implications:

   • Being as Essence: Implies a stable and predetermined nature for entities, emphasizing the universality of certain characteristics. It has implications for the understanding of identity and categorization.
   • Being as Esse: Emphasizes the dynamic and contingent nature of existence, suggesting that individuals are not bound by fixed essences. It has implications for personal responsibility and the fluidity of identity.

In summary, the distinction between Being as Essence and Being as Esse reflects different philosophical orientations. Being as Essence emphasizes inherent qualities and shared characteristics within categories, often associated with scholastic thought. On the other hand, Being as Esse, rooted in existentialism, underscores the individual and dynamic nature of existence, asserting that individuals define themselves through their lived experiences and choices.