Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2021 15:04:52 GMT
There are continuous mind when we dream, for example. There are continuous thought when we can found our ideias in a continuous basis of emission.
Meditation is the quest for continuous mind (and ilumination, nibana).
But there are some philosophical notes:
1. Reciprocity is a kind of stasis in the moment of flow, of perpetual flux. 2. There are notions we only can conceive by the aristotelian concept of substance, and that excludes exclusivity of the pureness of the concept itself.
For that we can conclude that an aristotelian mind cannot concept certain natural concepts, because the initial categorization of the terms of thought uses primarily and ultimately simultaneously the so called facts of conscience.
Because that an aristotelian mind can be a logician without being a teleologist. That is Spinoza discovery, in a certain sense.
Returning to teogenetics:
The philogenetical of reciprocication depends on and universal absolute enticity that explains transcendental relativity. And that is the finish and the end of relativity, as it can be sayed.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jan 15, 2021 23:57:57 GMT
How about that!
So there's no need of theleology? Then if one cause has been dropped (no puposes left), a sculptor – a man from Aristotle's example – is creating anything having no purpose to do that.
If someone asks that sculptor, what r u doin'? He probably answers: my work. But a nosy report would continue: but I want to know exactly what r u doin' or what will it be? The sculptor would answer: my job is to doing it, so leave me alone already!
With no purpose, nobody will be possible to respond anyone about an image. It's like having no image some painters start to paint.
That is why I put knowledge/image before any kind of believe. However, now I'm hesitating...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2021 15:33:29 GMT
No, that is not true.
Theleology is the study of the end, not the end itself.
A science is a study of an object that necessarily do not produce. And technology is the production with a insertion of discovery rationality, as I can say.
No science produces, but studies, his object.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2021 15:34:28 GMT
There is a end in theleology that is not the end he studies. It's a very complex reasoning and reason about.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jan 16, 2021 19:21:19 GMT
?
Anyway, I didn't want to say "the study of the end" or "...an end". No, I just to wanted to say about the causes, in particular, one of the causes of Aristotle, the teleological one - the purpose (to ἀγαθόν).
There are four reasons: essence, matter, the beginning (toe ἀρχὴ), and the purpose. Removing the last one will make the process of making something to be endless.
|
|