Essence and Object

Today was the last day of a sixty hour week. For the last five days I have been working at a traction fair. I am very tired. There's only been a few thoughts that I've had time to think.

For instance, I have been thinking about essence, identity and definition. On friday, I thought that the essence of an object and the definition of an object are our attempt to understand an object by identifying it with a class of objects. But, I think that this is an inexact way to think. And that if we go down this route the essence of an object will aways be the object's essence to us.

Definition is to do with identity and as such will always be inexact because there is a necessary dissimilarity between everyday objects and their definitions (i.e. all particular cats have features that are not covered by the general concept of "cat").

I hate the notion that we should start with the essence of an object, and understand the object by way of its state of being because if we start with essence then we run the risk of confusing essence and definition. And therefore we come to a circular reasoning: I know A is A because I have studied it based on its essential quality which is its A-ness.

Maybe we could understand essence as the opposite of definition. Maybe the essence of an object could be what sets it apart and makes it unclassifiable?

Or maybe not. I'm tired, and now it is lunch time.