Ian: Thanks Ron, :-) If I was a pedant, I might say it was a second or third-hand English translation from Latin, via Arabic, of something Parmenides said. But I'm not, so I won't.
Ron; Sorry if I came off pedantry (had to look that one up!) But I think a lot of what is being discussed is applicable To Parmenides concepts. Especially Hams views. Ian: We would then end up debating what he meant by nothing, each time he used whatever word(s) he used, and whatever the context was. Without that, it's still a slogan, albeit, Parmenides slogan. Ron: This has come to mind for me, is nothing DQ? Without pattern? Does void mean vacuum or does it mean formless? Ham as Parmenides States that it is static but I find this does not account for change. Now if void means formless then this leaves the door open for change For all levels of SQ, but if Essence is absolute and static until Sensed, it does not account for change on the inorganic level. reality then is the property of living organisms which does not account for in organic freedom of value. This is where I believe Quality trumps Ham and Parmenides. Ian: To avoid sleepless nights I find the best answer to how something came from nothing, is to say whatever it was always existed. (There was no first cause, existence just is .... time and causation are weirder than common sense suggests ... but as I say, the first-cause question has no interesting answer, it can only be the subject of theory, as Ham agrees, again.) Ron: I can do nothing but agree. Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
