The Paradox of Understanding

[Fairy]

Eod wrote:(The totality is nothing)


Age wrote: (Saying 'this' would be like 'trying to' CLAIM that 'the 'ce cream' and/or 'the elephant' is nothing.)


Fairy responds with: Not so, as the totality is nothing, until there is made apparent a differential distinction, which creates the apparent paradox of a subject and object, a knower and known. A nameless name, an unconceived conceived... In other words, this immediate nondual dual reality.







Age wrote: ('The totality' IS, OBVIOUSLY, 'TOTALITY', and NOT 'nothing' AT ALL.)

Fairy response: But the word 'totality' is nothing and meaningless without it's complimentary parts by association. Even though the totality is always and ever the superset of it's subset parts, there are no independent parts to the totality except in the conception, by definition, in this immediate nondual duality.

As Nonduality is not a thing, nondual simply means not two, but totally whole, no thing.....but this no thing whole is meaningless without the hole. Just as a doughnut is a meaningless concept without the hole to define it.

Nonduality challenges the way we typically view reality by suggesting that no true separation exists between self and world or subject and object.

[Belinda]

There needs to be a minimum of two distinct points for a line to occur. A single point would not be distinct, it would be a literal and metaphorical experience of void. The negation of void through distinction allows form to occur. The negation of a single point, as many points, gives rise to a basic form such as a line.

To void is to negate, to negate negation results in a positive, in this case a form.

I too enjoy and admire the language of Euclid. Measuring / quantifying is however not the only aspect of how the world appears to us.

Measurement is an experience and the world manifests itself as experience.

But measuring/quantifying is not the only experience .Quality is as much an aspect of experience as quantity.

[Atla]

You say that and then use points as distinctions and then say these distinctions are composed of points.

Pretty sure I said nothing of the sort. Points are just coordinates nothing more.

[Fairy]

BTW ...Age, I'm presuming you use the shift key when typing capital letters. Since you have already announced you do not use 'caps lock' ?

[Eodnhoj7]

You say that and then use points as distinctions and then say these distinctions are composed of points.

Pretty sure I said nothing of the sort. Points are just coordinates nothing more.

Coordinates are distinctions....anyhow:

Considering coordinates are purely space and space manifests through space, as evidenced by the nature of linear form in this thread, space dividing space as space is a paradox or points through points as points is the paradox.

[Eodnhoj7]

I too enjoy and admire the language of Euclid. Measuring / quantifying is however not the only aspect of how the world appears to us.

Measurement is an experience and the world manifests itself as experience.

But measuring/quantifying is not the only experience .Quality is as much an aspect of experience as quantity.

Relatively true, yes. But there is another way it can be viewed, at least potentially speaking:

Measurement is the act of making distinctions.

Distinction are how we acquire information through as the process of making a judgment (the distinction of good/evil, right/left politics, up/down, like/dislike, etc.).

Measurement is connected to judgements and an aspect of consciousness is the occurence of judgements. Quality and quantity are both distinctions and these aspects of observation require a contrast of each other to be distinct, this necessity of contrast necessitates a further relationship...a dual connective nature between the two.

[Age]

BTW ...Age, I'm presuming you use the shift key when typing capital letters. Since you have already announced you do not use 'caps lock' ?

If that is what you WANT to CHOOSE to PRESUME, then okay.

[Atla]

You say that and then use points as distinctions and then say these distinctions are composed of points.

Pretty sure I said nothing of the sort. Points are just coordinates nothing more.

Coordinates are distinctions....anyhow:

Considering coordinates are purely space and space manifests through space, as evidenced by the nature of linear form in this thread, space dividing space as space is a paradox or points through points as points is the paradox.

Nothing manifests, space just exists. I still have no idea where you see a paradox and why. How could humans exists if their distinct "atoms" wouldn't be spatially arranged, in a world that's spatially arranged? They couldn't exist. Abstract space is an abstract reflection of that. Abstract points in abstract space are abstract coordinates. They don't do anything.

[Belinda]

Pretty sure I said nothing of the sort. Points are just coordinates nothing more.

Coordinates are distinctions....anyhow:

Considering coordinates are purely space and space manifests through space, as evidenced by the nature of linear form in this thread, space dividing space as space is a paradox or points through points as points is the paradox.

Nothing manifests, space just exists. I still have no idea where you see a paradox and why. How could humans exists if their distinct "atoms" wouldn't be spatially arranged, in a world that's spatially arranged? They couldn't exist. Abstract space is an abstract reflection of that. Abstract points in abstract space are abstract coordinates. They don't do anything.

Maybe 'paradox' is not quite the exact word . Broadly there are two opposing views. One view, commonly referred to as atomism ,holds that there are minimal, indivisible units or building blocks. The other view holds that there is a continuum with no fixed points. The so-called paradox is that atomism , while it's necessary for quantifying reality, is unlike the idea of flux .

Change happens.

However atomists view change as happening between one fixed point and another, whilst other believers view change as flux and continuum.

[Eodnhoj7]

Pretty sure I said nothing of the sort. Points are just coordinates nothing more.

Coordinates are distinctions....anyhow:

Considering coordinates are purely space and space manifests through space, as evidenced by the nature of linear form in this thread, space dividing space as space is a paradox or points through points as points is the paradox.

Nothing manifests, space just exists. I still have no idea where you see a paradox and why. How could humans exists if their distinct "atoms" wouldn't be spatially arranged, in a world that's spatially arranged? They couldn't exist. Abstract space is an abstract reflection of that. Abstract points in abstract space are abstract coordinates. They don't do anything.

And what is the distinction of space that allows space to exist? Points through points. We only know existence by distinctions.

The paradox is grounded in the basic line, and all other forms by default: points exists through points where points become there own relational context. The line as a continuum of points between points makes the point self referential through variations of itself.

The point is empirical through one pointed attention on a form. Paying attention to the the center of a thing, or a single location of an edge is to make the distinction of a point.

The point is purely transitional, to pay attention to anyone point leads to another. To see anyone one form composed of points is to observe one point lead to another as the form itself. The relative nature of the point is the potentiality of form.

[Eodnhoj7]

Coordinates are distinctions....anyhow:

Considering coordinates are purely space and space manifests through space, as evidenced by the nature of linear form in this thread, space dividing space as space is a paradox or points through points as points is the paradox.

Nothing manifests, space just exists. I still have no idea where you see a paradox and why. How could humans exists if their distinct "atoms" wouldn't be spatially arranged, in a world that's spatially arranged? They couldn't exist. Abstract space is an abstract reflection of that. Abstract points in abstract space are abstract coordinates. They don't do anything.

Maybe 'paradox' is not quite the exact word . Broadly there are two opposing views. One view, commonly referred to as atomism ,holds that there are minimal, indivisible units or building blocks. The other view holds that there is a continuum with no fixed points. The so-called paradox is that atomism , while it's necessary for quantifying reality, is unlike the idea of flux .

Change happens.

However atomists view change as happening between one fixed point and another, whilst other believers view change as flux and continuum.

You are definitely correct with the atomist/continuum paradox. I actually never thought of it until now. But now I realize that is just another way of viewing the particle/wave dynamic of quantum mechanics.

But in regards to the first portion of what you said, paradox is the word as the line segment is this atomist/continuum paradox:

The two points is the point as atomic, to reduce the point is to keep the point through other points, this it is never truly reducible. In other words the reduction of the point to further points necessitates the point as never really changing.

The line is the point as a continuum where the point manifest by its self contextualization of itself, through others, as form.

The line observes the point as a self maintained context of points through points where this can be described as a self referential variation.

[Atla]

And what is the distinction of space that allows space to exist?

Nothing needs to allow space to exist, it just does.

[Eodnhoj7]

And what is the distinction of space that allows space to exist?

Nothing needs to allow space to exist, it just does.

I like how you ignored the rest, so I will put it in other words.

A point is pure space. Points occur through other points as space between spaces. Space is the ultimate paradox for the individuation of spaces is space.

The point is pure occurence and occurence just is.

[Atla]

And what is the distinction of space that allows space to exist?

Nothing needs to allow space to exist, it just does.

I like how you ignored the rest, so I will put it in other words.

A point is pure space. Points occur through other points as space between spaces. Space is the ultimate paradox for the individuation of spaces is space.

The point is pure occurence and occurence just is.

Yes I keep ignoring it because it makes zero sense to me. No a point is not pure space. Points don't occur through other points and I can't even begin to fathom what space between spaces is supposed to mean. What on earth is an individuation of spaces.

[Eodnhoj7]

Nothing needs to allow space to exist, it just does.

I like how you ignored the rest, so I will put it in other words.

A point is pure space. Points occur through other points as space between spaces. Space is the ultimate paradox for the individuation of spaces is space.

The point is pure occurence and occurence just is.

Yes I keep ignoring it because it makes zero sense to me. No a point is not pure space. Points don't occur through other points and I can't even begin to fathom what space between spaces is supposed to mean. What on earth is an individuation of spaces.

You say it makes zero sense, but pardon the pun, we are talking about a 0d point.

That is because paradoxes are difficult to understand. That is why they are called paradoxes.

The line evidences the point as the foundation of the paradox as the point as both one and many is evidenced by the line.

The point is one relating to itself through other points as these relations allow the point to occur and these relation show a connect of all points as one.

The point is many as its distinctions allow one point to gain identity by standing apart from another.

The point is the foundation for the dualism of one and many.

The point is relating to itself through points where it is is own self referential context through progressive variation of itself. In simple terms, a line segment is a continuum of points between points and as such all there is is a single point self referencing through infinite variations.

The simple point is the point of it all.