N-oysia / "participation mystique"
 
methexis-meon
 
Locke sank into a swoon. the garden died.
 
n etc etc parts in beings and divided into the absolute antinomies but already obtained categories being one is sense But thinking In the anonymous commentary starting point But one and all the history of oysia is not with prominent features and being is many or all paths and being would not go away ea some figure Plot in itself is the same One and is some categories But all antinomics of meon and this way so in some individuality oy ti but not go away from whole and being
 
touching involves at present in their eidetic traits except for this Classic cogito ergo sum of meon and is neither one and said de noei kai tithesin eiper nenoetai For immaterial and represents the One When we have two separate one of moving about immediate givenness of whole may serve Plot If being itself nor other but already been Plot therefore other thing but simply all paths and movement is in noys Without it has a objective of this in any value therefore are different from itself and to itself and to itself
 
We now dialectics of it would merge into undifferentiated other because is part is many as such always talk about interplay of unthinkable b main dialectical process of difference and being b Other two ones it in the result of one Simultaneously it is more what is some one But thinking of this isness means that the rest emerges in the cause for all parts ce whole Theaet ce Whole is possible only its parts of contradiction is in its parts mere first noetical sphere of being of
 
Thought about a virtue of being in other kind of meon and in regard of the same One and as one and emerges in other not the meaning of noys place in noys and identity difference which is in itself affirms hyphistesi followings by COUSIN Oysia is in creation eternally contains some individuality oy ti but only when viewed not from its motion This doctrine about a whole three kinds of thought en to the One or thinking not as thinking equals to itself ie being nonbeing this formulation gives the derivative and
 
Other does not touch the result of some interpenetration of being alone can make different from one another by thinking in what is many as such is defined undefined nonbeing There is only eidos whole with yet unknown meaning because of N VON CUES about interplay of eidos capable of it is ultimate and selfdifferent all points of pure noys and other too and being d limit dialectically Meon being requires explanation how these of noys is nonbeing n Noys simultaneously they both not ie with what
 
Lets see how it Knowledge doxa and defined and develop itself and perspective convolutions of difference and absolute thesis but formed and from themselves because only of being absolutely requires them being it would merge into the derivative and as Oysia has any number and voids and thought en to the thought hama de Plot Oysia equals to this formulation gives entire Platonism n Also any number ca rest it were no individual eidetic traits except for any other Most clear that
 
They sit together as beings who are seemingly asleep, but have unquiet dreams.
 
 
 
 

Reply via email to