Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Thu 23 Sep, 2010 11:31 am
The problem of Nothing is that it still refers even if by opposition to what is...process in which self excludes a true nothing.
Nothing as abstraction refers to Mind through MEMORY of what was and which still is processed substance...Time breaks down at this point once it cannot truly oppose BEING any more...Nothing which is nothing, is therefore memory and meaning, which is something...in the not being refers to the actuality of its opposite and "kills" itself as pure concept.
Such that WHAT IS LEFT, IS TRUTH !!!
(this is the reason I intuit that unity of Nature as Quality cannot be opposed or contradicted, and why I think although initial conditions can change from Universe to Universe, in the Multiverse, Nature itself can´t change as LAW.)

This post was in another similar Thread but I think its more adequate to bring here...
north
 
  1  
Reply Thu 23 Sep, 2010 04:21 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:

The problem of Nothing is that it still refers even if by opposition to what is...process in which self excludes a true nothing.
Nothing as abstraction refers to Mind through MEMORY of what was and which still is processed substance...Time breaks down at this point once it cannot truly oppose BEING any more...Nothing which is nothing, is therefore memory and meaning, which is something...in the not being refers to the actuality of its opposite and "kills" itself as pure concept.
Such that WHAT IS LEFT, IS TRUTH !!!


Quote:
(this is the reason I intuit that unity of Nature as Quality cannot be opposed or contradicted, and why I think although initial conditions can change from Universe to Universe, in the Multiverse, Nature itself can´t change as LAW.)

This post was in another similar Thread but I think its more adequate to bring here...



nothing is all about quailty , thats the point

well put Fil

north



0 Replies
 
mark noble
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Sep, 2010 07:19 am
Hi!

Is anybody here stating that 'nothing' exists?

And what is 'Truth'?

I know it is the opposite of a lie, ergo - what is a lie?

Are not all these 'things' mere subjective observations of what is otherwise immeasurable?

Mark...
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Sep, 2010 07:33 am
@mark noble,
mark noble wrote:

Hi!

Is anybody here stating that 'nothing' exists?

And what is 'Truth'?

I know it is the opposite of a lie, ergo - what is a lie?

Are not all these 'things' mere subjective observations of what is otherwise immeasurable?

Mark...
The truth like -nothing- is a moral form, all meaning, and no being...
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Sep, 2010 12:26 pm
@Fido,
What in the hell does it mean all meaning and no being, uh ???
Meaning ON WHAT ? What is left if no being to be meant ?
You don´t/can´t know what you´re saying...meaning and no being ?
Just what do you think in the first place meaning reports to, eh ? do you know what a representation and symbol are about ? It seams that a great deal of confusion goes on your notions...
north
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Sep, 2010 07:35 pm

huhhh ....

nothing exists in the practical form , as in , nothing in the account , nothing in the the fridge etc

now as as a dimension nothing has , no depth , no ability to change , no breadth ( extension along a two dimsional plane ) and no substance ( no ability to manifest )
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Sun 26 Sep, 2010 06:23 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:

What in the hell does it mean all meaning and no being, uh ???
Meaning ON WHAT ? What is left if no being to be meant ?
You don´t/can´t know what you´re saying...meaning and no being ?
Just what do you think in the first place meaning reports to, eh ? do you know what a representation and symbol are about ? It seams that a great deal of confusion goes on your notions...

All moral forms like Justice, mind, nothing, God, freedom, honor, do not point to a material existence but to a spiritual meaning... Physical forms have meaning and being, but moral forms are meaning only... And what can one say of moral forms that can be proved, and how can they as a group be defined other than as meaning, and finally where does that meaning come from... Meaning is value, which works fine for Nothing... Justice, or God, or love are values too, and not one that can be thrown on a scale and weighed, but have a value we give to it out of the store house of meaning, the source of all meaning which is our own lives... Physical being will still exist when we are gone, though we will not be, in any sense, to give them meaning... All the moral forms we give meaning to will die with us, deprived of meaning with our consciousness...

The confusion is not mine, but ours, the common quality of humanity, and you can see it right through the dialogues of Plato's Socrates... No answer will be forthcoming... It is easy to see that agreement can be reached, and that individual instances of some moral forms can be found... For two people disputing over justice in a particular instance may judge justice, and what is justice for one is justice for each, but behind that agreement is the relationship and life each seeks to maintain... The notion of distributive justice as presented by Hobbes cannot be maintained... All moral forms as much as physical forms are forms of relationship, but in moral forms it is the desire for the relationship that gives the form meaning... What is love without a lover??? What is justice without one to share justice with??? The last person on earth will be deprived of meaning before the loss of being, because when we live and when we communicate what we communicate is meaning, and yes, being once an English major, I know what representation and symbol are, and you must know that even for some physical beings like scents no symbol can be formed apart from the object causing the scent, such as smelling like a rose... Just as with moral forms, scents are perceived subjectively and not at all accurately, so it is by agreement that they are in every instance defined... Otherwise, moral forms are infinites... The character of justice in one situation may have nothing whatever in common with justice in another situation even though people may agree that eact are examples of Justice, and no third example will be like the first two.. They are all infinite, because they are not objects... Existence or life or reality are not objects, and cannot be considered as objects, but have meaning without a specific being... All moral forms are in-fin-ites, which no amount of attention can de-fin-e... There is not end to love, and there is no end to nothing...
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Sun 26 Sep, 2010 06:43 am
@north,
north wrote:


huhhh ....

nothing exists in the practical form , as in , nothing in the account , nothing in the the fridge etc

now as as a dimension nothing has , no depth , no ability to change , no breadth ( extension along a two dimsional plane ) and no substance ( no ability to manifest )

When we measure objects we measure space, but that is not enough to define it...
north
 
  1  
Reply Sun 26 Sep, 2010 08:35 pm
@Fido,
Fido wrote:

north wrote:


huhhh ....

nothing exists in the practical form , as in , nothing in the account , nothing in the the fridge etc

now as as a dimension nothing has , no depth , no ability to change , no breadth ( extension along a two dimsional plane ) and no substance ( no ability to manifest )

When we measure objects we measure space, but that is not enough to define it...


yes it is
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Sep, 2010 05:13 am
@north,
north wrote:

Fido wrote:

north wrote:


huhhh ....

nothing exists in the practical form , as in , nothing in the account , nothing in the the fridge etc

now as as a dimension nothing has , no depth , no ability to change , no breadth ( extension along a two dimsional plane ) and no substance ( no ability to manifest )

When we measure objects we measure space, but that is not enough to define it...


yes it is
No; it is not... And I would defer to Kant on this, and it has been awhile, but consider, that if you have a box full of space, and you can measure that space, then that space is connected to all infinite space everywhere, unless you can close the box, and then you are presuming to measure something you cannot see exactly, nor identify, as it is out of sight... We use matter to measure space, and space to measure matter, but you know we cannot see the end of it, not hold it as an object, so to suggest it is other than infinite is without support...
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Sep, 2010 08:15 am
On Meaning and Being:

1 - Meaning is better described as something that represents another something through symbol...therefore establishing a function. So meaning is about linking things through association, thus through pattern, algorithm...

2 - Meaning itself has always the same "behaviour", to represent, therefore implying a constant, a fundamental intrinsic nature...as simultaneously also implying a constant in representations themselves which is the very own property of being representable...

3 - There can be of course a chain of representations of representations...but eventually, there must be a set of all this representations, that must form together the holistic united essence of WHAT IS...even if through them or in them...

Finally to say that:

...An algorithm imply´s a labyrinth as much as the labyrinth imply´s algorithms...

So when someone say´s that there is no BEING (but only meaning), thus denying TRUTH and LAW, someone is saying nothing at all...
(Foolish people...)
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Sep, 2010 08:32 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:

On Meaning and Being:

1 - Meaning it is something that represents another something through symbol...therefore establishing a function. So meaning is about linking things through association, thus through pattern, algorithm...

2 - Meaning itself has always the same "behaviour", to represent, therefore implying a constant, a fundamental intrinsic nature...as simultaneously also implying a constant in representations themselves which is the very own property of being representable...

3 - There can be of course a chain of representations of representations...but eventually, there must be a set of all this representations, that must form together the holistic united essence of WHAT IS...

Finally to say that:

...An algorithm imply´s a labyrinth as much as the labyrinth imply´s algorithms...

So when someone say´s that there is no BEING denying TRUTH and LAW, someone is saying nothing at all...
(Foolish people...)
Of physical reality you are correct that the meaning of a thing represents that something... Of moral reality no such connection can be made except in the most general sense... Justice does not stand for a material fact, a reality, but an infinite moral form... What ever justice may be said to BE in a particular instance is a spiritual state, a moral condition; and this tells us little of justice as an infinite... What is true of all moral forms is that they get their value and meaning in relation to our own lives because humanity has found it cannot live without these moral forms... No justice means no life, and life itself is a spiritual quality, another moral form, and THE moral form that gives all moral forms and even physical forms their meaning... Without life all the forms which you find meaning in would be nothing, and less, for nothing is a moral form as well...

Of physical reality, you are correct in the presumption of a stable situation... All our forms even of changing states, like melting, or boiling presume a steady state... We can give a name to chaos, or to emotions but because they cannot be defined neither can a concept of them in the true sense of the word- be formed of them... We cannot conceive of chaos... We can only know, that is, conceive of, objective reality, as an object, an identity that remains stable...
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Sep, 2010 08:35 am
@Fido,
Oh man...

What "material" ???

Forget that...We don´t know any more what the word means...

Think in terms of functions...imagine that "Hardware" and "Software" are fundamentally the same !
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Sep, 2010 09:01 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:

Oh man...

What "material" ???

Forget that...We don´t know any more what the word means...

Think in terms of functions...imagine that "Hardware" and "Software" are fundamentally the same !

Hardware and software are essentially the same... Each is a part of the physical world, each is a form, each is an identity, each must function, that is, be true to the end for which it was made in order for the whole of which it is a part to function.... Their difference is evident as well...
I know when we talk about material reality we are talking about so many meanings... That is Schopenhaurs, the world as meaning...But; behind the forms of physical reality there is a physical being that will exist on when we are no more as spiritual beings..
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Sep, 2010 06:54 pm
@Fido,
1 - Can you get a Metaphor ?
2 - Define Material.
3 - Define Spirit.
4 - Define what separates them.
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Sep, 2010 10:17 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:

Quote:
1 - Can you get a Metaphor ?
Can you get an allegory, all our knowledge as concept, form, idea, notion, etc are allegorical, since it only reasonable that we can never know anything completely, never grasp its meaning completely, never define even the most finite object... At best we know enough, and relatively we know nothing... So save pointless metaphores... Just say your piece...
Quote:
2 - Define Material.
Material is that which can be defined because it is finite...Dr. Johnson kicked a rock and the rock kicked back...We know the world through our own senses...
Quote:
3 - Define Spirit.
Spirit is how all objects and moral realities are defined... We do not take from objects their being when we take knowledge of them, but their essences in the form of ideas, or concepts
Quote:
4 - Define what separates them.
Moral forms which are purely spiritual qualities we know only because of their secondary effect on our lives which are each defined spiritually as soul, or animus...Spirit is pure meaning, but as I said, how even physical objects are conceived, in fact, as all reality is conceived... All the virtues had their patron Goddess, qualities like fortune was a Goddess as was Nemesis... These were only how these qualities were conceived of, but physical objects, mountains, trees, rivers, lakes all had their spirits... Try as we might, though we do not anthropomorphize the qualities we conceive of, still we cannot escape the fact that it is the essence, the visage, the memory, the spirit of -by which we call to mind our objects and moral forms... Spirit is meaning...
0 Replies
 
north
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Sep, 2010 09:43 pm
@Fido,
Fido wrote:

north wrote:

Fido wrote:

north wrote:


huhhh ....

nothing exists in the practical form , as in , nothing in the account , nothing in the the fridge etc

now as as a dimension nothing has , no depth , no ability to change , no breadth ( extension along a two dimsional plane ) and no substance ( no ability to manifest )

When we measure objects we measure space, but that is not enough to define it...


yes it is
No; it is not... And I would defer to Kant on this, and it has been awhile, but consider, that if you have a box full of space, and you can measure that space, then that space is connected to all infinite space everywhere, unless you can close the box, and then you are presuming to measure something you cannot see exactly, nor identify, as it is out of sight... We use matter to measure space, and space to measure matter, but you know we cannot see the end of it, not hold it as an object, so to suggest it is other than infinite is without support...


just measure the object its self regardless of the space around it
0 Replies
 
north
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Sep, 2010 10:14 pm
with something within space , I can use basic geometry to describle its form

around , square , rectangular etc , no space is needed to describe the form of something

but with nothing there is no fundamental form to measure , I can't draw the form of nothing out of space , like I can with something , to stand on its own , and measure it , not even with basic , fundamental geometry

nor will nothing have for infinity

Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Sep, 2010 10:55 pm
@north,
Do you, then, consider space to be 'nothing'?
north
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Sep, 2010 11:01 pm
@Merry Andrew,
Merry Andrew wrote:

Do you, then, consider space to be 'nothing'?


do you mean what is in space ?

or space its self ?
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
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
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 05/06/2024 at 04:12:08