Ron said: > This philosophical discussion is an old one, a good read of Aristotle's > Metaphysics really explains some good reasons as to why "nothingness" > and zero are riddled with inconsistancies and problems as far as a > primary explanation of experience.
Ham: Zero or nothingness may be an "abstraction" in relational logic, but not in metaphysical reality. Ron: ESPECIALLY in a Metaphysical construction of reality! it's not experienced! Essentialism all rests on a abstraction. You really can't deny this. Ham: Logically, if Essence is Absolute, it contains no other. Ron: Right logically it contains no other and there can be no other besides. Ham: Finitude is then Essence reduced by Nothingness. Ron: Finitude is then limit. How can Essence which we just admitted as absolute, be reduced by a second entity? what slight of hand are you trying to pull? it conflicts and contradicts entirely the meaning of "absolute". c'mon Ham. Ham: But Essence has no Nothingness. Therefore, negation is the power of Essence to create finitude. My conclusion: Essence is negational Ron: How about limit, for any experience to have any meaning, it's much easier to explain and it works logically but your explanation above is well,,inconsistant illogical and unclear. Essence cant be negational if it is absolute. Otherwise you render the term "absolute" meaningless. Absolute is absolute Ham, not just when it's convieniant to be in certain contexts. Ron: > Do realize that dualism and opposites result from the act of explanation > and the use of language; to take them as actual constituants of reality > is a reification of those relational concepts of meaning. You seem to be living in a semiotic world, Ron. Since when do we need mathematics and logical symbols to recognize contradiction? Explication and language do not produce the self/other duality nor the difference between black and white. Such opposites are intellectualized directly from experience, even if we are mute creatures who have no language. Ron: Right opposites are an intellection drawn from experience, in experience there are no opposites only distinction. Opposites are a result of explanation. But I know that kills your theory so you can't accept that. Ham: If you have an alternative theory, why don't you express it in plain words for the rest of us? Ron: I believe I just did. thnx 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/md/archives.html
