Ham,
I have been following your threads w/Krimmel and I follow you and agree
with your statements
up until (maybe this is my misunderstanding) the negation of the essent,
when summed up means
because there is substance in the unverse its negate is nothingness a
vacuume an absolute zero
with the rational of since there is a one(1) there must be a zero(0) and
that tension is what
drives all.

The logical vehicle that brings us to this point and the logic employed
to arrive at essent vs.
nothingness conflicts.
If infinity is infinte, how then may nothing (an absolute) exist to
create tension?
Is this not preconcieved logic operating at the most fundemental level?


The final question is- are you not doubtful that the theory of an
absolute
 is ultimately based on a preconception?


I feel that once you hang your hat on any absolute, even if it is
absolute zero(nothingness)
You are hanging your hat on pre-conception and the finite.

Thank you for you're time
_Ron
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/

Reply via email to