On Pedro’s recommendation, I am forwarding this exchange to the list.
Best,
Lou
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: Louis H Kauffman <lou...@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Vol 25, #32, Nature of Self
> Date: April 29, 2016 at 12:12:26 PM EDT
> To: Alex Hankey <alexhan...@gmail.com>
> Cc: "Pedro C. Marijuan" <pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es>
>
> Dear Alex,
> In set theory, the empty set can be regarded as ‘framing nothing’.
> Thus it is denoted by an empty container { }.
> The properties of the container are not relevant, only that ‘it’ manages the
> act of containment.
> “We therefore take the form of distinction for the form.”
> From there, one generates all the multiplicities in mathematics by further
> acts of framing.
> { }
> { { } }
> { { }, { { } } }
> ad infinitum.
> If we said this in LOF it would be essentially the same, but parsimonious in
> that the comma as an extra distinction would not be needed.
> If A is a set, then {A} is another set obtained by the act of framing. We see
> it all as ‘framing nothing’ when the sets are traced back to their empty
> origins as in
> the layers of an onion. Some layering might have to be traced back forever
> alas as in {{{{{…}}}}}. This is why set theorists are not happy to have sets
> that are members of themselves at the foundation. Nevertheless, in order to
> have language at all, self-reference is necessary. In LOF the mark < > is
> seen to be a distinction and to refer to a distinction and so refers to
> itself.
> At that point one realizes that in the form, the mark and the reader or
> writer or observer are identical. Tat tvam asi.
> Best,
> Lou
>
>> On Apr 29, 2016, at 5:47 AM, Alex Hankey <alexhan...@gmail.com
>> <mailto:alexhan...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> RE 1 Louis Kauffman: Emptiness is form and form is emptiness. The form we
>> take to exist arises from framing nothing.
>>
>> RE 2: The objects of our thought and perception are so laden with the names
>> and symbols that have been shifted to them, that their ?original nature? is
>> nearly invisible.
>>
>> ME 1: Many philosophers of the East, such as Nagarjuna and Adishankara agree
>> that when one realizes that the real 'Self' has no form (and no history of
>> change) that this frees the embodied soul from being trapped in forms that
>> get reincarnated in time. It is the Ultimate Liberating Realization!
>>
>> The Maharishi International University mathematician, Michael Weinless,
>> formerly an Asst Prof at Harvard, was correspondingly fond of RusselL's
>> distinction between ϕ and [ϕ].
>>
>> Is this the same as what you are referring to, the 'framing of nothing'?
>>
>> ME(2): I suspect that the cognitions of a fully enlightened person is
>> acutely aware of the additional nonsense that has surrounded the original
>> simplicity in such cases.
>>
>> E.G. In the webinar, I became acutely aware of many layers of academic
>> comment / prejudice etc. that surround almost every seemingly innocent
>> discussion question.
>>
>> --
>> Alex Hankey M.A. (Cantab.) PhD (M.I.T.)
>> Distinguished Professor of Yoga and Physical Science,
>> SVYASA, Eknath Bhavan, 19 Gavipuram Circle
>> Bangalore 560019, Karnataka, India
>> Mobile (Intn'l): +44 7710 534195 <tel:%2B44%207710%20534195>
>> Mobile (India) +91 900 800 8789
>> ____________________________________________________________
>>
>> 2015 JPBMB Special Issue on Integral Biomathics: Life Sciences, Mathematics
>> and Phenomenological Philosophy
>> <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00796107/119/3>
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
