|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on May 5, 2021 0:25:11 GMT
Nothingness cannot be observe except through the multiplicity of phenomenon. Under the experiment of observing complete void only the self is observed thus necessitating the subjective state of the "I" observing the subjective state of the "I" therefore two or more "I's" being observed: the "I" observing and the "I" being observed . Nothing is observed through being and this being is observe through multiplicity.
Dually under a void, where only the "I" is observed, the "I" in multiple subjective states necessitates the "I" as repeating itself through new forms, thus one "I" is observed. Under these terms the multiplicity of "I's" is a dualistic state to the one "I" existing through variation. The "I" is thus both one and many leading to a dualism of not being and nothing but rather one being and multiple beings.
|
|
|
Post by MAYA-EL on May 5, 2021 22:11:34 GMT
Great concept to bad you've never experienced observing this little shindig go down
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on May 10, 2021 17:48:48 GMT
Great concept to bad you've never experienced observing this little shindig go down Nothingness is not a concept, it is nothing. Nothingness can be observed as behind a concept which is taken as axiomatic or rather no thought behind it.
|
|
|
Post by MAYA-EL on May 10, 2021 20:40:05 GMT
Great concept to bad you've never experienced observing this little shindig go down Nothingness is not a concept, it is nothing. Nothingness can be observed as behind a concept which is taken as axiomatic or rather no thought behind it. You still can't seem to understand that you are making a concept called "nothingness" and its characteristics and or lack thereof And all the while not stoping to realize that in order for you to present "it" and " defend" it and tell people about "it" you have to create "somthing" in order to do that . Now i realize that you are presenting the "lack" thereof in between states or things as your evidence which is indeed different then presenting tangible physicality as evidence however it still counts as something even though you're merely pointing to the lack of something the simple fact that you know about it and can point to it even in a roundabout way still makes it "something" which therefore is not "nothing"
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on May 11, 2021 0:12:31 GMT
Nothingness is not a concept, it is nothing. Nothingness can be observed as behind a concept which is taken as axiomatic or rather no thought behind it. You still can't seem to understand that you are making a concept called "nothingness" and its characteristics and or lack thereof And all the while not stoping to realize that in order for you to present "it" and " defend" it and tell people about "it" you have to create "somthing" in order to do that . Now i realize that you are presenting the "lack" thereof in between states or things as your evidence which is indeed different then presenting tangible physicality as evidence however it still counts as something even though you're merely pointing to the lack of something the simple fact that you know about it and can point to it even in a roundabout way still makes it "something" which therefore is not "nothing" To refer to nothing as "it" is to refer to the potentiality of a phenomenon or phenomena. Nothingness is potentiality. Potentiality is multiple beings as that which is actual manifests to further actuals thus necessitating multiple actualities. Nothingness is multiplicity as it is not even a concept it's own terms....hence the title "Unity and Multiplicity not Being and Nothing". Joustos seems to be in agreement.
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on May 11, 2021 0:20:16 GMT
Nothingness is not a concept, it is nothing. Nothingness can be observed as behind a concept which is taken as axiomatic or rather no thought behind it. You still can't seem to understand that you are making a concept called "nothingness" and its characteristics and or lack thereof And all the while not stoping to realize that in order for you to present "it" and " defend" it and tell people about "it" you have to create "somthing" in order to do that . Now i realize that you are presenting the "lack" thereof in between states or things as your evidence which is indeed different then presenting tangible physicality as evidence however it still counts as something even though you're merely pointing to the lack of something the simple fact that you know about it and can point to it even in a roundabout way still makes it "something" which therefore is not "nothing" So tell me how everything exists in multiplicity without there being absences or voids of being.
|
|
|
Post by MAYA-EL on May 11, 2021 7:48:22 GMT
You still can't seem to understand that you are making a concept called "nothingness" and its characteristics and or lack thereof And all the while not stoping to realize that in order for you to present "it" and " defend" it and tell people about "it" you have to create "somthing" in order to do that . Now i realize that you are presenting the "lack" thereof in between states or things as your evidence which is indeed different then presenting tangible physicality as evidence however it still counts as something even though you're merely pointing to the lack of something the simple fact that you know about it and can point to it even in a roundabout way still makes it "something" which therefore is not "nothing" So tell me how everything exists in multiplicity without there being absences or voids of being. I literally just explained that to you
|
|
|
Post by MAYA-EL on May 11, 2021 7:49:57 GMT
You still can't seem to understand that you are making a concept called "nothingness" and its characteristics and or lack thereof And all the while not stoping to realize that in order for you to present "it" and " defend" it and tell people about "it" you have to create "somthing" in order to do that . Now i realize that you are presenting the "lack" thereof in between states or things as your evidence which is indeed different then presenting tangible physicality as evidence however it still counts as something even though you're merely pointing to the lack of something the simple fact that you know about it and can point to it even in a roundabout way still makes it "something" which therefore is not "nothing" To refer to nothing as "it" is to refer to the potentiality of a phenomenon or phenomena. Nothingness is potentiality. Potentiality is multiple beings as that which is actual manifests to further actuals thus necessitating multiple actualities. Nothingness is multiplicity as it is not even a concept it's own terms....hence the title "Unity and Multiplicity not Being and Nothing". Joustos seems to be in agreement. Multiplicity is not the same as no-thing
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on May 11, 2021 19:30:08 GMT
So tell me how everything exists in multiplicity without there being absences or voids of being. I literally just explained that to you And what explanation was that? I haven't seen one which explains it. For A to move it must occur through the absence of A with this absence being the potentiality of A to change from one state to another.
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on May 11, 2021 19:33:04 GMT
To refer to nothing as "it" is to refer to the potentiality of a phenomenon or phenomena. Nothingness is potentiality. Potentiality is multiple beings as that which is actual manifests to further actuals thus necessitating multiple actualities. Nothingness is multiplicity as it is not even a concept it's own terms....hence the title "Unity and Multiplicity not Being and Nothing". Joustos seems to be in agreement. Multiplicity is not the same as no-thing Void is observed through multiplicity and is inseperable from it. One phenomenon changing into another is the void of that phenomenon. For example a particle moving from point A to point B observes the particle in point A not being in point B thus is absent of point B. When the particle moves it changes from A to B with this B being the absence of A.
|
|
|
Post by MAYA-EL on May 12, 2021 23:24:12 GMT
I literally just explained that to you And what explanation was that? I haven't seen one which explains it. For A to move it must occur through the absence of A with this absence being the potentiality of A to change from one state to another. Why do you think that the absence of a is nothing? That would be like me saying that everything outside of my range of vision doesn't exist at all which clearly isn't the case so because a is moving through something and is no longer where it was doesn't mean but there is this void it just simply means that there's other things where A used to be
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on May 17, 2021 16:12:31 GMT
And what explanation was that? I haven't seen one which explains it. For A to move it must occur through the absence of A with this absence being the potentiality of A to change from one state to another. Why do you think that the absence of a is nothing? That would be like me saying that everything outside of my range of vision doesn't exist at all which clearly isn't the case so because a is moving through something and is no longer where it was doesn't mean but there is this void it just simply means that there's other things where A used to be The absence of A is the void of A. Void is an observation of relation. When something is absent of a phenomenon it is void of said phenomenon. Even if B exists in the spot absent of A, B is the void of A. Void is the potentiality of A to change forms. When talking about voids one is talking about the absence of said phenomenon. This absence is the means through which one phenomenon changes into another. A moves to B because B does not have A present. Now taking this at a larger perspective when looking at the totality of being to say there is an absence of being is to say there is void. Considering only being exists being is unified under itself as one phenomenon. This one phenomenon of being is voided, but considering this one phenomenon is all that exists the one is negated into many. Many phenomenon exist as the voiding of the one. These many phenomena are in turn voided into many further phenomenon but considering only being exists these many phenomenon are united under one being. The void is the masking of one phenomenon through many where the many is the approximation of the one. Void is the absence of seeing all phenomenon as United as it is the potential change of phenomenon moving from A to B. Void is the observation of change as the observation of time.
|
|
Triangle
Full Member
Posts: 356
Likes: 134
|
Post by Triangle on May 17, 2021 17:11:54 GMT
Nothing is the pre being, the anterior consequence which is the mother of ten thousand things.
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on May 17, 2021 23:14:16 GMT
Nothing is the pre being, the anterior consequence which is the mother of ten thousand things. Thus nothing is potentiality with potentiality being the absence of actuality hence the absence of being.
|
|
|
Post by MAYA-EL on May 18, 2021 9:02:00 GMT
I guess this is the side effect of an under developed imagination in today's society Because society is full of grown adults that are completely unaware of the line between reality and imagination and are completely unaware of when there perspective of life has been hijacked by a bord imagination. Truly troubling .
|
|