0
   

Astonishment at Being

 
 
Reconstructo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Mar, 2010 12:15 am
@north,
north;135203 wrote:
we can think of nothingness as ;

having no dimension ( no ability to manifest )


I think you can shrink it down to an infinitesimal, but not to pure nothingness. Just my opinion.
north
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Mar, 2010 12:19 am
@Reconstructo,
Reconstructo;135207 wrote:
I think you can shrink it down to an infinitesimal, but not to pure nothingness. Just my opinion.


but yes to pure nothingness

even the quantum has something there , always
Reconstructo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Mar, 2010 12:28 am
@north,
north;135210 wrote:
but yes to pure nothingness

It seems to me that the concept itself will have to have a certain mind-space. is it possible to think of it wordlessly/numberlessly?

---------- Post added 03-03-2010 at 01:29 AM ----------

north;135210 wrote:

even the quantum has something there , always

what do you mean? Are we agreeing?
0 Replies
 
north
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Mar, 2010 12:33 am
@Reconstructo,
Quote:
Originally Posted by north http://www.philosophyforum.com/images/PHBlue/buttons/viewpost.gif
man is not pure negativity , I'm not anyway

No, man is the collision of pure negativity and spatial being. But this negativity concept is hard to grasp. It must be inferred. What is the Being of beings? What is raw existence made of?

where does this pure negativity come then ?
jeeprs
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Mar, 2010 01:04 am
@Reconstructo,
I don't know if this is relevant, with regards to this idea of 'nothingness', but I wonder if it is not something like the Buddhist 'sunyata' or 'emptiness' that is being spoken of? This is symbolised in Zen with a roughly-drawn zero, like this. Is that is what we are getting at here?
0 Replies
 
Reconstructo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Mar, 2010 01:09 am
@north,
north;135223 wrote:
Quote:

where does this pure negativity come then ?


It must be inferred. It is what makes our concepts and numbers singular. It is why we perceive the world as sliced into objects (conceptually, not visually.)

What is the Being of beings? What is the most minimal being you can think of/ What is it made of? Emptiness and a form that makes it a singular emptiness. This singularity is imposed by nous. Please check out Appearence and Reality for more, as I have written so many times already, but my explanation is all over the place.:bigsmile:

---------- Post added 03-03-2010 at 02:15 AM ----------

jeeprs;135254 wrote:
I don't know if this is relevant, with regards to this idea of 'nothingness', but I wonder if it is not something like the Buddhist 'sunyata' or 'emptiness' that is being spoken of? This is symbolised in Zen with a roughly-drawn zero, like this. Is that is what we are getting at here?


I can't tell. There are two distinct reductions. One is a concept, and the other is a concept of the non-conceptual. In my view, the bare minimum concept is well described as 'being,' and this is actually equivalent to number, except slightly more abstract, as it does not hint to integration with a number continuum. But Parmenides' "One" is the same thing.

The other reduction is behind this. But it can only be inferred. I think this is what they mean by the "uncreated.' It's is necessarily paradoxical, because it is a digital or unified representation of the non-digital which is also non-spatial . Pure negativity. A strange but brilliant concept. It's the knife that cuts distinctions. But it cannot cut beyond the One, for the mind is digital. One is its lowest terms. Hence Hegel's logical inference was necessary. And probably the Greeks and their Nous. (The Number that was never a number, but the source of all number....)
I'm thinking they wouldn't represent it with a circle. I came upon by thing of the logical operator "not" as used so often in philosophy. what is the logical meaning of not? It only exists in relation. "not" is the uncreated which is only manifest in the spatial present......as a hole is only manifest in the donut.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 04/14/2021 at 05:56:17