What is/are not "one" or "many"
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-09-2013, 12:52 PM
 
RE: What is/are not "one" or "many"
Absols, even your written words are infinitely more annoying than my signature gif. I don't know if it is really fitted into the category of "one" or "many". Maybe I should change my signature, I think.
Quote this message in a reply
21-09-2013, 12:57 PM
 
RE: What is/are not "one" or "many"
(21-09-2013 11:17 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(21-09-2013 11:12 AM)Mike Wrote:  How about the actual infinity?

Ain't no. Renormalization. The first step mathematics takes into reality (other than philosophy) is physics. And physics tolerates no infinities. Thumbsup

The "actual infinite," according to me, Girly, and tao, is Void. And there is no "rational" expression of Void. "Nothing" essentially 'creates' everything.

Then we can say "Void" is/are not one or many, right?

But for me even the word "Void" is a misnomer, it is at best must be called as "nonsenseness". Consider
Quote this message in a reply
21-09-2013, 01:20 PM
RE: What is/are not "one" or "many"
(21-09-2013 12:25 PM)absols Wrote:  truth by definition is the reference that justify else existence even if totally the same willing mean and reality, like twins at birth for instance

therefore one as a whole existence is not only impossible or opposite to truth reference but is definitely pointed to b killed first before else in concept is meant

e existence is mean and reality, like to b killed totally pointed totally thereference the refereference but is that justify else ins at justify else is meant truth referefereference that justify else in conce but is definite that befor opposite the same willing mean and reality, like to truth reality, like that justify else existence but is not only impossible one as at before or in conce in concept is that justify else existence thereference but is not only pointed first before even if totally imp

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense

[Image: Hitchhikersguide_zps7678fbae.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-09-2013, 01:22 PM
RE: What is/are not "one" or "many"
especially when it is meant as everything source
what is the logic that support that??? how do they know the void??? or how nothing as a source of smthg is possible mean ???

and i agree ur pics are really annoying, and hard to avoid
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-09-2013, 02:54 PM
RE: What is/are not "one" or "many"
(21-09-2013 12:32 PM)absols Wrote:  tell me the concept of god as a creator is based on wat exactly????

Ever hear of trinity? Homo sapiens sapiens is the tale of the trine: simulation of mind in brain (1) simulation of future in mind (2) simulation of mind of another in mind.

These elements combine to produce Agency... ever see a movie where the protagonist hears a sound in the dark and instinctively questions "who's there?"

Why "who?"

Because we simulate the greatest threat of our environment - ourselves - and call it "who" rather than "what."

"What happened?" becomes "who is responsible?" becomes "why?" becomes "can we simulate a future to predict past behaviors?"

Therefore god...

Prophet is merely "naive philosopher;" most do not know god, rather, tales of god from prophets.

Why?

Because once we stopped needing to feed ourselves, "trade" emerged. Perhaps you have heard, "prostitution is the oldest profession?" I think I have a counter-claim, that society first supported the teller of tales.

Maybe. Big Grin

[Image: 10289811_592837817482059_8815379025397103823_n.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-09-2013, 08:57 PM
RE: What is/are not "one" or "many"
(21-09-2013 12:57 PM)Mike Wrote:  ..it is at best must be called as "nonsenseness". Consider

el shem

Those who believe in Name, claim priority. I say, first there was Void on which to the write the Name. Like this whitespace. And as a prophet, give me whitespace...

I love my Gwynnies! Heart

ktheniloveyoubyebye

[Image: 10289811_592837817482059_8815379025397103823_n.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-09-2013, 10:02 PM
 
RE: What is/are not "one" or "many"
(21-09-2013 08:57 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(21-09-2013 12:57 PM)Mike Wrote:  ..it is at best must be called as "nonsenseness". Consider

el shem

Those who believe in Name, claim priority. I say, first there was Void on which to the write the Name. Like this whitespace. And as a prophet, give me whitespace...

I love my Gwynnies! Heart

ktheniloveyoubyebye

Is that Taoism? Tongue
Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mike's post
21-09-2013, 10:48 PM
 
RE: What is/are not "one" or "many"
(21-09-2013 11:22 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(21-09-2013 11:12 AM)Mike Wrote:  most people...

...don't know wtf they're talking about. They break out their fingers and go... 1...2...3... 10... infinity. And don't even stop to realize that number - essentially - does not exist.

As for the original question, I'm with Chas... are you trying to "see non-electromagnetic colors," or are you posting theology?

One is an interesting question that makes my brain hurt - that may be beyond the bounds of our evolutionary heritage - the other, simply answered, in that "they don't know wtf they're talking about."

So "one" and the next following numbers aren't exist thus numbers are actually just illusions? Consider

So how do you consider if you found a single apple on a table? Should we hesitating to not say that the single apple on the table as "one"? Tongue
Quote this message in a reply
22-09-2013, 02:38 AM
RE: What is/are not "one" or "many"
(21-09-2013 10:48 PM)Mike Wrote:  
(21-09-2013 11:22 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  ...don't know wtf they're talking about. They break out their fingers and go... 1...2...3... 10... infinity. And don't even stop to realize that number - essentially - does not exist.

As for the original question, I'm with Chas... are you trying to "see non-electromagnetic colors," or are you posting theology?

One is an interesting question that makes my brain hurt - that may be beyond the bounds of our evolutionary heritage - the other, simply answered, in that "they don't know wtf they're talking about."

So "one" and the next following numbers aren't exist thus numbers are actually just illusions? Consider

So how do you consider if you found a single apple on a table? Should we hesitating to not say that the single apple on the table as "one"? Tongue

yes trapped here

u confuse what exist bc u dotn behave right

what is present is not the relative thing

what is present is only the absolute thing so it would b out of everything then justify its existence being truly present fact

in materialistic term, freedom is only always present

but to say it in stupid words so u can see what is right better, what exist is who take the apple he is the present not the apple that cant move nor mean anything by itself

which also prove my means being right, when i say, whatever direct another is the present existing fact not the directed who become relative in his freedom since another is over it

which explain constant reactions and strong ones now against any other pretense of being superior to itself, and mostly when the reaction is of what never mean being superior nor anything

u should understand how it is wrong to pretend knowledge over others and give urself credit by pretending teaching others anything
u r bringing everything down by forcing the concept of up being over others and else rights

each sense is a right of being an absolute free superiority by itself present fact
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-09-2013, 03:10 AM
 
RE: What is/are not "one" or "many"
(22-09-2013 02:38 AM)absols Wrote:  
(21-09-2013 10:48 PM)Mike Wrote:  So "one" and the next following numbers aren't exist thus numbers are actually just illusions? Consider

So how do you consider if you found a single apple on a table? Should we hesitating to not say that the single apple on the table as "one"? Tongue

yes trapped here

u confuse what exist bc u dotn behave right

what is present is not the relative thing

what is present is only the absolute thing so it would b out of everything then justify its existence being truly present fact

in materialistic term, freedom is only always present

but to say it in stupid words so u can see what is right better, what exist is who take the apple he is the present not the apple that cant move nor mean anything by itself

which also prove my means being right, when i say, whatever direct another is the present existing fact not the directed who become relative in his freedom since another is over it

which explain constant reactions and strong ones now against any other pretense of being superior to itself, and mostly when the reaction is of what never mean being superior nor anything

u should understand how it is wrong to pretend knowledge over others and give urself credit by pretending teaching others anything
u r bringing everything down by forcing the concept of up being over others and else rights

each sense is a right of being an absolute free superiority by itself present fact

Huh

Can you write in a proper English? Sorry I just can't comprehend Absolsish.
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: