The first thing the intellect does with an object is to class it along with something else. But any object that is infinitely important to us and awakens our devotion feels to us also as if it must be sui generis and unique. Probably a crab would be filled with a sense of personal outrage if it could hear us class it without ado or apology as a crustacean, and thus dispose of it. “I am no such thing,” it would say; “I am MYSELF, MYSELF alone.

It is true that we instinctively recoil from seeing
an object to which our emotions and affections are committed
handled by the intellect as any other object is handled. The first
thing the intellect does with an object is to class it along with
something else. But any object that is infinitely important to us and
awakens our devotion feels to us also as if it must be sui generis and
unique. Probably a crab would be filled with a sense of personal
outrage if it could hear us class it without ado or apology as a
crustacean, and thus dispose of it. “I am no such thing,” it would
say; “I am MYSELF, MYSELF alone.”
The next thing the intellect does is to lay bare the causes in
which the thing originates. Spinoza says: “I will analyze the actions
and appetites of men as if it were a question of lines, of planes,
and of solids.

"Let's put it this way: an object created by the human spirit and intellect, which means a significant object, is "significant" in that it points beyond itself, is an expression and exponent of a more universal spirit and intellect, of a whole world of feelings and ideas that have found a more or less perfect image of themselves in that object - by which the degree of its significance is then measured. Moreover, love for such an object is itself equally "significant." It says something about the person who feels it, it defines his relationship to the universe, to the world represented by the created object and, whether consciously or unconsciously, loved along with it."

In addition to that sentience, which the insect or animal has, the human being is endowed with intellect. Intellect is what is cognized, which the animal need not do. So it is this power of the intellect to discriminate and interpret what is cognized that gives the individual being a sense of individuality and makes him consider himself something special in this manifestation. What is more, he goes to the extent of believing that the entire manifestation has been created for his benefit! So, all the time he is thinking, In what way can I benefit by exploiting nature?" And the extent to which the human being has 'benefited' himself, we can all see.

Every way of classifying a thing is but a way of handling it for some particular purpose.

The idea is that the object has a language unto itself.

What we call things and where we draw the line between one class of things and another depend upon the interests we have and the purposes of the classification. For example, animals are classified in one way by the meat industry, in a different way by the leather industry, in another different way by the fur industry, and in a still different way by the biologist. None of these classifications is any more final than any of the others; each of them is useful for its purpose.

For even the simplest act of naming a thing is an act of thinking—of comparing one thing with others, selecting certain features in common, ignoring what is different, and making an imaginary category.

The wonder of an object is that it is not a thought. A thing is first and foremost itself. An inconsequential pebble picked up on the side of the road has preceded us by anything up to four hundred million years, and its face will be brightened still further by rain that will fall here thousands of years after we have vanished. We might change things in the world, yet the most minimal, seemingly insignificant object outlasts us.

By an object, I mean anything that we can think, i.e. anything we can talk about.