The Meriam-Webster dictionary's definition is,
1 a obsolete : reality as opposed to appearance
They also say that it originated in the 14th Century. Wasn't that around the time of the Middle Ages, interesting that such a word came to light in such times.
b : reality as presented in experience
c (1) : the totality of existent things (2) : a particular being
d : sentient or living being : LIFE
If we now put a philosophical spin on it, we find that there is a whole branch
of philosophy devoted to it's study, this is METAPHYSICS.
Sometimes known as the study of reality, sometimes known as the study
of mind, it's aim is nearly always the same, to find what makes us
what we are.
Many believe that metaphysics is a necessity if one is to understand
what is going on around one. We're not talking about democracy or war,
we're talking about thinking and understanding the basics to life. Coming
to conclusions about, what the basics are.
There are many a person in the world that has never considered the structure
of the being. Never discussed whether there is a mind, a soul. Never contemplate
a world beyond this reality. Never look at their, existence.
These are the problems/thoughts that plague the philosopher's brain.
The concept of existence was create well before the 14th Century. In
ancient Greece it was a common point of discussion. Aristotle wrote a book
titled 'Metaphysics' back in 350 BCE.
The very first paragraph of the first book says,
ALL men by nature desire to know. An indication of this is the delight we take in our senses; for even apart from their usefulness they are loved for themselves; and above all others the sense of sight. For not only with a view to action, but even when we are not going to do anything, we prefer seeing (one might say) to everything else. The reason is that this, most of all the senses, makes us know and brings to light many differences between things.Maybe back then that was the case for the majority, but I believe that there are very few people around today who have a desire to know, to think, and although many people would deny that this is the case, one just has to look at how successful the media is at portraying a biased view. If these people really did by 'nature desire to know', then why do they take at face value 98% of what they read or see. If they are unable to question or explore the essence of democracy or war, then how is it possible for them to comprehend the issues of being! This is the difference between the 'common person' and the 'thinker', a natural grasp of the layers that make up this reality.