I have to disagree with the premise that the world of forms does follow logical rules. as far as I know only mathematical systems follow logical rules, but I don't think people are talking about the worlds of maths when they talk about forms vs. emptiness. people make up logics and try them out and they have some ad hoc utility and then the edge of their usefulness is reached (and then the ad hoc logic is dropped in the face of reality or it is held onto anyways :)
Some times the world of the relative is more like math (e.g. trying to debug a recalcitrant computer system) and some times it's less (trying to calm down an angry person) but many people will make up theories and reason with them in either case (hmm, msg count here is N, msg count there is N * 2.0; hmm, they are talking about me not hearing what they are saying, hmm, I was thinking about getting coffee) As to whether or not there exists some ultimate formulation of physics which is mathematical, many physicists assume there is, and that makes sense to me, but it's essentially unprovable. Till that formulation exists, it's all provisional (albeit extremely useful). Thanks, --Chris [email protected] +1-301-270-6524 On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 5:36 AM, Kristopher Grey <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 4/6/2012 7:18 PM, Edgar Owen wrote: > > > > The error is that to have Zen you must directly experience reality as it > actually is. Without understanding what reality actually is you'll forever > mistake illusion for reality... > > > With any "understanding" of this, that you believe to be so, you mistake > your take on "reality" for reality. > > Same error. > > > K > > > >
