RCSaunders wrote: ↑Thu Sep 27, 2018 7:03 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 27, 2018 6:20 pm
Considering all abstract and physical phenomenon stem from "limit" ...
A "limit" is a math concept and only pertains to some physical phenomena. For example, they have no meaning for phenomena described by fractals. Mathematics itself, like language is only a method invented by the human mind, and also has no existence (or meaning) independent of human consciousness.
Until you understand the difference between the "man-made" and the metaphysical I do not think you can make much progress in philosophy.
Randy
Actually "limit" stems back to the presocratics and is not limited to strictly a mathematical conception only considering all conceptions are mental limits in themselves.
In these respects all limits exist through limits with basic limits such as the line, circle and point existing through all abstract and physical realities.
This statement is a linear one as it is directed in a specific direction.
Where some cultures direct a statement from left to right (as a projection of the observer away from the origin to form reality) or right to left (as a projection towards the observer to form the observer) the statement is formed by its linear projection regardless.
This projective capacity of reason, as fundamentally being directional, effectively observes reasoning as having a geometric nature where the chain of axioms (the words) exist as a series of points existing through points synonymous in both form and function to the line.
Because the statement, such as this one, requires an inherently directive capacity it in itself which observes a form and function of limit as directed movement where the statement exists if and only if it continues from and through further statements.
The statement, as a linear limit, exists through further linear limits and hence we can observe all linear logic as the observation and foundation of relativism where one part exists through another with the linear limit being the foundation of all relating parts.
Considering the linear statement requires the progression of one axiom to another, thrugh the word, sentence, paragraph, etc., the axioms gains its definition by being directed to further axioms. However consider the axiom in itself is strictly a self evident point, fundamentally inverting to another point, what we observe is a repitition of axioms as approximates to other axioms where each axiom is an approximate of the other.
In these respects the axiom is directed towards itself and maintains an intradimensional nature as a point of pure self-direction which is approximated through multiple axioms under a multiplicity of axioms (considering we cannot observe one pure axiom except through multiple axioms).
In these respects the axiom takes on a causal nature where it exists through the connection to another axiom as effect while being a cause in itself.
Because the axiom exists through the axiom, all definition within linear arguments maintain a third degree of circularity where using this sentence as an example "Because" is defined through "the" (in the beginning of the sentence) and "the" is defined through "because". Now "because" and "the" while defining eachother, give a degree of definition this definition requires a further expansion of definition.
In these respects the axiom exists fundamentally through the directive qualities of the point (self-directive and inversive) line (projected past itself) and the circle (projecting and self directing) and it dependent upon the triadic base of the point line and circle in geometry as directive limits.
