|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Sept 27, 2021 22:16:15 GMT
The field defines the horse as the horse exists through the field. The field has different qualities of the horse. These different qualities show that the field has something which the horse lacks. This lacking of said qualities of the horse allows the horse to exist through the field as this is a void which allows the horse to exist and move through.
The horse could not move, therefore exist, if this space was already cluttered through the same qualities of the horse which the horse already has. This void of the horse, embodied within the qualities of the field, allows the horse to exist with this existence being an emergence from that which the horse is not, which is the field.
The field, in its absence of qualities of the horse, allows the horse to emerge from it. The field is what the horse is not and as "not the horse" acts as a negative limit in defining what the horse is not. This negative limit describes something by that which it is not so in effect the field causes the horse to exist as the field is a negative definition of the horse with the horse being defined by what it is not.
|
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Oct 4, 2021 20:34:19 GMT
The horse is defined by what it is not. What the horse is not is the limit as to what the horse is. What the horse is not, ie the field, provides a contrasting definition to what the horse is with this contrast necessitating the horse emerges from the field.
This emergence from a phenomenon which is not the horse, ie the field, shows the horse as emerging from a void. This seems like a contradiction at first given the field is not a void. However the field as void of the horse's qualities shows a respective void of the horse itself.
The void of the horse, through the field, shows the horse as emerging from something which is not the horse, ie void of the horse. In these respects the contrast which allows the horse to exist, the field that is, is a relative void. Being emerges from a void of its very same qualities with this void allowing for a contrast to occur. This contrast is definition of the phenomenon.
Void is necessary for contrast, contrast for definition of said being, thus void is necessary for definition. Definition allows for existence of a being as a particular or part of a larger whole.
So yes the field is necessary for the horse to exist as it establishes a relationship necessary for existence, but dually the horse is not dependent upon the field as some other phenomenon which is not the horse, ie all phenomena except the horse, allows for the necessary void through which the horse exists. The horse exists through void as this void is the negative limit of what the horse is and by negative limit it is meant as defining the horse by what it is not.
A whole variety of phenomena are not the horse thus what causes the negative limits of what the horse is composed of ranges to all of being which is not the horse, which is a very considerable range of being and can be stated as: all negative limits are all being which is not the horse thus all being which is not a horse is respectively the void of said horse.
Being cannot relate to another phenomenon unless there is a void as this void allows for the contrast necessary for a relationship to occur. This contrast is necessary for a relationship given a relationship is the equivocation of two or more different phenomenon where they are both the same except for where they are different. This difference, through contrast, allows for for the individual definition of said entities where they are defined strictly for what they are as singular units.
In simpler terms the horse may derive definition through equivocation to the field in the respect both are made up of molecules, with this equivocation occuring through the respect both have molecules, but the horse and field as having respectively different forms necessitates the form of the horse existing for what it is as a singular entity in contrast to the field with the form of the field existing for what it is as a singular entity in contrast to the horse.
Contrast allows for a singular entity to emerge from its respective void with this singularity being the phenomenon itself as a single occurence which exists in opposition to its void. In simpler terms a phenomenon emerges from void and this emergence allows for its identity thus necessitating not all identity is grounded in a relationship.
|
|
