Hi Joe --
1/1=1
1/0=?
A computer programmed with the most logical language possible
will not answer 1/0.
A computer is programmed by human beings to process digits according to
man's mathematical precepts. Zero is an irrational (unreal or imaginary)
number. The Sumerians invented it 5000 years ago as a "placeholder" for
inscribing numbers larger than 60, and it re-emerged in 5th century India as
a multiplying integer of the decimal system. Divison by zero is disallowed
in conventional mathematics because its reciprocal function as a multiplier
of any number (0 times X) always equals zero. Infinity is also an
irrational number. Although it is used in Calculus and Algebra, Aristotle
rejected infinity as an existing reality on the premise that a whole number
cannot be infinite because one can never count to infinity.
These restrictions do not hold for metaphysical theory, however, since
Unity, Nothingness and Infinity are not physical quantities but conceptual
aspects of reality. The theoretician cannot define ultimate reality in
numerical terms, but he can use equations to symbolize the concepts he is
trying to articulate. Thus, while 1/0 is an unknown quantity in
mathematics, Unity/Nothingness represents Infinity in metaphysics.
Mathematical logic does not declare finite dimensions false in any
rational sense, except division by 0 which is irrrational.
Mathematical logic has a sign of infinity for unending computations.
Dimensions are the domain of physics. "Therefore" is imaginary.
Mathematical values are logical; Otherwise?????
1/0=i
After writing the above my computer which is programmed by
the most rigorously logical program refuses to do any more
computations on the key pad.
Machines are not capable of intuitive thought or abstract conceptualization.
"Rigorously logical" only means that your computer is consistent in
computing to the prescribed program. How could it possibly do more?
Since: 1/1=1 I have no idea how you divide logic into metaphysical,
existential, absolute? Evolution describes an order in existence yes or
no.
If yes then the order is moral lower to higher?
Evolution is the process of change in a system, generally in the direction
of greater complexity. The assumption that evolution has an esthetic or
moral component is a speculative theory fostered largely by Pirsig. I see
no support for the notion that goodness or betterness is more complex than
evil or worseness. "Higher" and "lower" applied to moral standards are
poetic aphorisms used to support a theoretical hierarchy that has no
empirical foundation. In short, there is nothing in the order of existence
that implicates human morality, and I have never bought into the idea that
the universe is inherently moral.
Existence is divided by Aristotle into a real existence for the body and
immaterial soul. Intentional existence was derived from a perception that
thoughts and decisions are immaterial, that the soul has a separate
existence from the body. Is it logical to attribute truth to a perception
that existence is divisible into intentional and real existence? Is a
simple
metaphysical declaration valid without further evidence?. I answer Mu!
Un-ask the question about a "logical error"!. How can nonsense be an
error?
According to Runes' Dictionary of Philosophy, the definition of mind in
terms of "intentionality" originated with the Scholastics and was later
revised by Brentano to become a theory of German phenomenology. Since I
don't distinguish intentional and real existence, I can't answer your
question as to whether truth can be atttributed to such a division.
However, I will say that metaphysical propositions can be validated on their
own merits, which typically are cogency or consistency with the theory as a
whole, logical construction of the major postulates, and accommodation to
(non-violation of) empirical principles. The value of a metaphysical
proposition is a subjective determination, inasmuch as metaphysics
transcends experiential evidence.
The mind becomes a creator from nothing by abstracting the essence
from the image and giving it intentional existence in a mind from the
intentional existence of the soul which is beyond materiality.
Way beyond Occam's Razor.
Way beyond my comprehension. Again, you lost me at "intentional".
How do you perceive levels in existence?
I don't.
From a moral sense of lower to higher! Existence comes in 7 flavors,
colors of the rainbow, the musical scale from Do through Ti, etc!
Morality!
Occam's razor. No need to complicate things.
No need at all!
Thanks for making it all so clear, Joe.
--Ham
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/
