|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Mar 15, 2019 20:50:03 GMT
Identity is grounded in both equivication and non-equivocation where "identity" itself is grounded in "relations" in which one axiom exists as fundamentally a ratio.
A exists as B and C; hence b and c are a ratio.
For example "horse" exists as the ratio of the axioms "mammal", "herbivore" and "x" (with "x" observing other definitions).
Horse = mammal, herbivore, "x"
observes equivocation where the horse is the connection of axioms as a static unchanging role.
It also observe equivocation where the horse is a boundary of change where it progresses from one axiom to another.
Equivocation as undefined takes on a dynamic role in "P=P"
Equivocation as defined takes on a static role in =P=.
Equivocation, as well as the variable, in which both exist through eachother observe function as form (or "proof" as "function" where the "proof" effectively is a "form"): "P=".
The axiom of "excluded middle" observes divergent properties.
The axiom "inherent middle" (as an oppositve of "excluded middle" where the "excluded" middle either exists or does not exist" observes convergent properties.
"Excluded Middle" and "Inherent Middle" as both divergence and convergence observes all axioms as synthetic in nature.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Apr 17, 2019 21:38:41 GMT
Identity is grounded in both equivication and non-equivocation where "identity" itself is grounded in "relations" in which one axiom exists as fundamentally a ratio. A exists as B and C; hence b and c are a ratio. For example "horse" exists as the ratio of the axioms "mammal", "herbivore" and "x" (with "x" observing other definitions). Horse = mammal, herbivore, "x" observes equivocation where the horse is the connection of axioms as a static unchanging role. It also observe equivocation where the horse is a boundary of change where it progresses from one axiom to another. Equivocation as undefined takes on a dynamic role in "P=P" Equivocation as defined takes on a static role in =P=. Equivocation, as well as the variable, in which both exist through eachother observe function as form (or "proof" as "function" where the "proof" effectively is a "form"): "P=". The axiom of "excluded middle" observes divergent properties. The axiom "inherent middle" (as an oppositve of "excluded middle" where the "excluded" middle either exists or does not exist" observes convergent properties. "Excluded Middle" and "Inherent Middle" as both divergence and convergence observes all axioms as synthetic in nature. You spew more crap than an elephant with diarrhea on a strict diet of baked beans and rotten cabbage. |
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Apr 18, 2019 21:53:45 GMT
Identity is grounded in both equivication and non-equivocation where "identity" itself is grounded in "relations" in which one axiom exists as fundamentally a ratio. A exists as B and C; hence b and c are a ratio. For example "horse" exists as the ratio of the axioms "mammal", "herbivore" and "x" (with "x" observing other definitions). Horse = mammal, herbivore, "x" observes equivocation where the horse is the connection of axioms as a static unchanging role. It also observe equivocation where the horse is a boundary of change where it progresses from one axiom to another. Equivocation as undefined takes on a dynamic role in "P=P" Equivocation as defined takes on a static role in =P=. Equivocation, as well as the variable, in which both exist through eachother observe function as form (or "proof" as "function" where the "proof" effectively is a "form"): "P=". The axiom of "excluded middle" observes divergent properties. The axiom "inherent middle" (as an oppositve of "excluded middle" where the "excluded" middle either exists or does not exist" observes convergent properties. "Excluded Middle" and "Inherent Middle" as both divergence and convergence observes all axioms as synthetic in nature. You spew more crap than an elephant with diarrhea on a strict diet of baked beans and rotten cabbage. And that is a crap argument.
It is real simple.
A or B, grounded in the law of excluded middle is "divergent" in nature as a choice between properties necessitates the properties as fundamentally seperate.
Choosing Vanilla or Chocolate Ice cream necessitates a separation between in "Ice cream". "Or" is divergent in nature.
"Inherent Middle" necessitates that Vanilla and Chocolate are fundamentally connected by "Ice cream".
Because Chocolate/Vanilla equal so many things (candy, icecream, color, etc.) the law of equivocation is always a property of connection where "chocolate" itself is a middle point as there are many "chocolates".
Because C=(ca,i,co,etc.) it maintains a static role as a constant quality. This can be observed in the principle "=P=" where P effectively is the center point that defines "equality" as "equality" is undefined, hence dynamic in meaning, considering the statement P=P observes "P" as defined through its relation to "P" but "=" is undefined and fundamentally assumed.
This definition through relation is grounded in "symmetry" where "P" exists has an identity because of its relation to itself...however "=" is undefined hence "P=P" observes a dynamic state to the property of idenity as it is dependent upon a center axiom (equality "=") which is undefined.
In "=P=" the center axiom of "P=P", or "=" is fundamentally defined because of an isomorphism where the repition of "P" in "P=P" allows for identity properties of "P". "=" requires this, hence the law of identity is dualistic in nature through "P=P" and "=P=". Both "P=P" and "=P=" are defined through eachother thus necessitating the third law where "P=" or "P" and "=" exist as themselves or simply "as is". The nature of identity is ground in this "as is" state thus necessitating identity to be a form and function of "definition" itself. Identity is definition with definition having active and passive elements.
Because "=" effectively diverges "P and P", "=" is divergent in nature. It is convergent in "=P=" respectively as it is brought together through "P" when using "P=P" as the starting law which progresses to "=P=" to justify "=" in "P=P".
All identity has a synthetic nature in these respects as it is necessitated by convergent (joining) and divergent (seperating) properties.
|
|
