Spanish to English Social Sciences Philosophy

Hello everyone!

I’ve come across a problem while translating a philosophy text with the terms “ser” and “estar” in the combination “ser”, “estar” and “parecer”, which show up together in different contexts in my text. The text is on the ideological inscription of free subjects and is quite dense and difficult.

If anyone knows where this concept originally comes from, that could be helpful. I've used terms in their original language in other places in the text, like Heidegger's Sein and Seiende.

ORIGINAL EXAMPLE 1
Si no reprodujéramos nuestro modo de vida entre todos/as, a diario, no habría manera de SER, ESTAR Y PARECER; tres verbos atributivos que precisan de un sujeto gramatical, pero, sobre todo, cuando se trata de “nosotros”, la pregunta es si ese “sujeto” (persona, cosa, ente), donde parece no haber nada más que pura abstracción conceptual sobre la lengua como “sistema” o “estructura”, ha existido siempre; y la respuesta es un rotundo no.

ROUGH DRAFT EXAMPLE 1
If we did not reproduce our way of life together every day, there would be no possibility of BEING, EXISTING AND SEEMING, three attributive verbs that require a grammatical subject. However, especially when it comes to ‘we’, the question arises as to whether this ‘subject’ (person, thing, or entity), where there seems to be nothing but a pure conceptual abstraction about language as a ‘system’ or ‘structure’, has always existed, and the answer is a clear no.

ORIGINAL EXAMPLE 2
Por supuesto, durante toda la historia del Islam, como sucede con las demás religiones, la violencia religiosa es una constante; pero aquí hablamos del especial impacto de las relaciones sociales capitalistas (y su norma inconsciente: el sujeto libre) en sociedades cuyo discurso -como el feudal- es todavía organicista, lo cual supone, como rasgo relevante, el hecho de que en él se excluye (repetimos, solo discursivamente, porque, en la práctica, esto es ya imposible) la idea de que la subjetividad pertenezca al individuo (y en este sentido dicho discurso niega su libertad de SER, ESTAR Y PARECER en sí mismo libre), etc.

ROUGH DRAFT EXAMPLE 2
Of course, religious violence is a constant in the history of Islam, as with other religions; but here we are concerned with the particular effects of capitalist social relations (and their unconscious norm): the free subject) in societies whose discourse —like the feudal society— is still organic, implying as a relevant feature the fact that it excludes —again, only discursively, since this is impossible in practice— the idea that subjectivity belongs to the individual (and in this sense such a discourse denies the individual's freedom to BE, TO EXIST AND TO SEEM FREE), etc.

ORIGINAL EXAMPLE 2
Piénsenlo, señores, y concluirán que la condición de ser en absoluto implica la materia; significa solo la conexión entre atributo y sujeto, expresa meramente una relación.” (p.124, la traducción y el subrayado son nuestros.) La materia física pertenece a la materialidad social, pero no es pertinente para ella. Lo pertinente es la relación entre EL SER, ESTAR, EL PARECER y el sujeto.

ROUGH DRAFT EXAMPLE 3
Consider it, gentlemen, and you will admit that a state of being by no means implies substance, and means only the bonds attributed to the subject, expresses only a relation.' (English translation by William Patten on behalf of Project Gutenberg. Italics are the author's.) Physical matter belongs to social materiality, but is not relevant to it. What is relevant is the relationship between BEING, EXISTING, SEEMING and the subject.