|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Mar 3, 2021 3:11:56 GMT
The concept of the perfect circle continually repeats across multiple observers thereby making the perfect circle infinite.
It is the continual repetition of a phenomenon which makes it infinite.
For example a continually progressive function of the number line necessitates 1 existing in perpetual variation given each number is the number one repeating itself. Under this number line progression 1 exists as perpetually changing thus 1 is repeating in newer and newer variation through the numbers which follow from it.
1 as perpetually changing is 1 as an action. One as a continual action is 1 as infinite.
Infinity is perpetual change as action and can never be observed in its entirety except through the source which repeats itself under newer and newer variation. Infinity can be observed in the number 1 given 1 is infinite through perpetual change.
Infinity thus can be observed through the finite where the finite is the point of change from one phenomenon to another. Each finite object is infinite through its continual change with this change from one finite phenomenon to another being multiple infinities.
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Apr 28, 2021 18:04:42 GMT
xxxxxxxxx No, it's not that bump. Usually some write a program or a strategy to obtain something, or to reach the goal. I disagree with all those Clossovsky and the rest postmodernists that no programs left. By the way, do you have any articles or ideas about or on postmodernistic ideas? Or any other social philosophy problems? All social philosophy problems are a question of how to be. This question of how to be regresses to metaphysics as the question of being qua being.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Apr 28, 2021 18:10:04 GMT
xxxxxxxxx No, it's not that bump. Usually some write a program or a strategy to obtain something, or to reach the goal. I disagree with all those Clossovsky and the rest postmodernists that no programs left. By the way, do you have any articles or ideas about or on postmodernistic ideas? Or any other social philosophy problems? All social philosophy problems are a question of how to be. This question of how to be regresses to metaphysics as the question of being qua being. Honestly, I also see anything us tied up with metaphysics. However, there are people who still struggle it. And one more question, please. "To be" and "to do" are the same questions or not?
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Apr 28, 2021 18:11:37 GMT
All social philosophy problems are a question of how to be. This question of how to be regresses to metaphysics as the question of being qua being. Honestly, I also see anything us tied up with metaphysics. However, there are people who still struggle it. And one more question, please. "To be" and "to do" are the same questions or not? They are variations of eachother thus mirror common similari similarities while being simultaneously different at the same time.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Apr 28, 2021 18:18:18 GMT
Honestly, I also see anything us tied up with metaphysics. However, there are people who still struggle it. And one more question, please. "To be" and "to do" are the same questions or not? They are variations of eachother thus mirror common similari similarities while being simultaneously different at the same time. In other words, one of this question (to be or to do) triggers a recursion in which each of the question appears as in the mirror (as the reflection) of another one.
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Apr 28, 2021 18:30:34 GMT
They are variations of eachother thus mirror common similari similarities while being simultaneously different at the same time. In other words, one of this question (to be or to do) triggers a recursion in which each of the question appears as in the mirror (as the reflection) of another one. Yes.
|
|