If I am hot, and then cold, are quantities still in play? You mean quantities of heat and quantities of cold?
What about an intermediate state, a splash in a cold pool after a sauna? Isn't there a fraction of time when I would perceiving two quantities and not one? my feet in the cold water, my head still hot because of the hot steam in the sauna? Is there still a unit?
(This is, indeed, a tricky one. I guess that no one has ever survived to tell us what he perceived, and if he did he was too shocked to tell).
I confess that I feel a bit disoriented here.
Just hope that the above questions are not totally out of the scope of your hypothesis, because it'd mean I have understood nothing :listening:.
I refer once more to ineffability of sensation and emotion. I created a triangle diagram that's in my pictures. One version is labeled. I agree with Kojeve/Hegel and maybe Plato/Aristotle that man is Logos incarnate. The Logos in itself is absolute pure concept, and number gets very close to this. So does Being. But since Logos is incarnate, it makes its contingent concepts in relation to sensation and emotion. Aristotle saw this, I think. Forms of mud and hair. All we ever speak with are forms, forms, forms, contingent concepts. Because the proto-concept must be intuited. No name is its true name. Because it's the clay that concept is made of. It exist in logical space, except that logical space is made of it. It's a wild thought, you see. It's utterly prior to all intelligibility. Parmenides and Heraclitus both danced around it. Parm focused on the static finite absolute concept, and Heraclitus looked at flux..but also logos of course.
If it interests you, check out my Ineffability and (In)significanc of Qualia threads. These treat of continuous sensation/emotion.
THanks for engaging me on this. :detective:
---------- Post added 06-02-2010 at 06:19 PM ----------
Can you give some examples of excatly where this quantity comes to play, I fail to see it in my everyday, also in all my friends everyday.
I'm suggesting that every noun you use is a unity. I'm suggesting that every object you see is a unity. All pluralities are unities. If I say 5 birds, the number 5 is a unified plurality. THat's why and how we have ONE symbol for it. We can't think 5 unless we think of 5 ones put together.
---------- Post added 06-02-2010 at 06:24 PM ----------
Recon, your thread is accurate if you mean and understand fundamentally ONE. When we think individually quantity, "more" is created. We can't create more. It's impossible. It's like trying to put ten gallons of water into a five gallon bucket, ha! There just "is" and no more than that. More and any thought of it creates waste and nature will take it's/her/god's course to maintain it's purity/balance.
Yes, I do mean ONE, but probably in a different way than you are responding to. I'm saying that unity is prior to all other concepts. All of them. So this is going at the heart of human logic/discourse. In itself it's not about ethics, although it does have consequences for ethics, if one experiences it vividly. All concepts save one are contingent. There are no "true" or "final" concepts.
Now metaphorically speaking, I think we are all "in God" all the time. But "God" is just a concept, and the concept of God is not God, in my book. Because all concepts are created and destroyable except the proto-concept, pure unification or indeterminate being. This concept is essentially finite. Man doesn't think the infinite. But he does LIVE it, experience it emotionally and with his senses. The letter kills/blinds. The spirit (love, beauty) gives life, is life.
Thanks for your post, William. :flowers: