|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Jul 7, 2022 20:45:42 GMT
We only observe forms through contrast. The contrast of a blade of grass to a field allows for the blade of grass to be seen. The contrast of the inner/outer form of a circle allows the circle to be seen. Forms require contrast. Without contrast form ceases to exist.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jul 11, 2022 19:13:13 GMT
Doesn't it share the same meaning as the phrase:
forms require forms?
|
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Jul 22, 2022 14:45:44 GMT
Thus dualism, is necessary as a priori ontology.
|
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Aug 4, 2022 23:52:35 GMT
Doesn't it share the same meaning as the phrase: forms require forms? The absence of unity amidst the forms necessitate certain forms as having an absence of some quality found in another form. This absence is a void thus the individuality of forms comes from nothing. |
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Aug 4, 2022 23:55:47 GMT
Thus dualism, is necessary as a priori ontology. A priori and a posteriori are false dichotomies as all a priori truths are expressed through the senses (especially in the act of expressing such truths through communication) and all a posteriori truths are accepted "as is" without justification behind them (ie they are rooted upon senselessness) |
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Aug 5, 2022 12:30:39 GMT
Doesn't it share the same meaning as the phrase: forms require forms? The absence of unity amidst the forms necessitate certain forms as having an absence of some quality found in another form. This absence is a void thus the individuality of forms comes from nothing. According to Plato there was a unity. Even Aristotle didn't object to it. You've been repeating constantly that any two things have something in common, therefore all the universe is being united. Why on Earth right now forms cannot be united? And if there was indeed a void, then a form would have been not a form. No, any forms have something in common, and if there is something in common, there is a bridge, and even if there is a void it can be crossed. So, I see your argument to be pointless. |
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Aug 11, 2022 21:13:57 GMT
The absence of unity amidst the forms necessitate certain forms as having an absence of some quality found in another form. This absence is a void thus the individuality of forms comes from nothing. According to Plato there was a unity. Even Aristotle didn't object to it. You've been repeating constantly that any two things have something in common, therefore all the universe is being united. Why on Earth right now forms cannot be united? And if there was indeed a void, then a form would have been not a form. No, any forms have something in common, and if there is something in common, there is a bridge, and even if there is a void it can be crossed. So, I see your argument to be pointless. Using the example of the cat and dog: the cat and the dog are united in both are animals. The cat and the dog are not united, i.e. they are void of characteristics found in the other, as they are different types of animals. Unity and disunity occur simultaneously. |
|
