Existence Is Infinite

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Martin Peter Clarke
Posts: 1617
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2025 9:54 pm

Re: Existence Is Infinite

Post by Martin Peter Clarke »

Age wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 4:34 am
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Fri Apr 18, 2025 11:38 am
Age wrote: Mon Apr 14, 2025 8:24 am Once more, Existence, like Universe, is everywhere, all the time.
Existence and Universe, whatever they are, may be, but everywhere there was, is and shall be, all the time there was, is and shall be, was, is and shall be existence. Of which our blip of a universe is an infinitesimal part.
What has some insignificant part of THE Universe, which you refer to as 'your blip', got to do with any thing, here?

Now,
'Universe', to some, means or refers to, All-there-is; Everything; Totality. So, that is what the word, 'Universe' is, exactly, here.

'Existence', to some, is the word used to refer to 'Being', (in this place), which is 'known' and that the 'I' in every human body is Aware of. So, that is what the word, 'Existence', is, exactly, here.

There is only One Universe and One Existence, which 'I' am Aware of. If 'you' know or are aware of any others, then will 'you' please inform 'us' of them?

Once more, this One and only Universe, which Exists, is infinite, spatially, and, eternal, temporally. And, again, this can not be refuted by any one.

And, if any one would like the irrefutable proof for this claim, then, as always, allow 'us' to just have a Truly open and honest discussion.
I reason that universes come and go in the infinite multiverse. I don't know about this Universe of yours. Cosmos can have that connotation. The all.

I don't refute your One and only Universe, which Exists, is infinite, spatially, and, eternal, temporally. I'm talking about existence and universes.
Martin Peter Clarke
Posts: 1617
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2025 9:54 pm

Re: Existence Is Infinite

Post by Martin Peter Clarke »

daniel j lavender wrote: Fri Jun 16, 2023 5:44 pm Existence Is Infinite
Daniel J. Lavender


Abstract

Existence is infinite in extent and eternal in duration. Only nothing or nonexistence could actually limit existence; however, nothing or nonexistence is not and cannot be. Existence is infinite, existence is not limited as there is [not] nothing beyond existence to limit or restrict it.


Terms and Definitions

Existence (n.): Being; that which is perceived, at least in part; that which is interacted with, at least in part, in some way. In context of this essay existence in the general sense.

Infinite (adj.): Immeasurable; vast; unlimited or unrestricted.

Nonexistence (n.): Non-being; no thing, nothing, nothingness; is never perceived or interacted with other than as a concept or term; it does not and cannot exist. A contradictory concept and term.

Consciousness (n.): Awareness; process allowing feedback of existence.

Intelligence (n.): Recognition of patterns in existence and their application for some benefit.

Thing (n.): An existing, material or immaterial; a part of existence. That which is perceived or interacted with, at least in part, in some way. E.g. a word, an object, matter, energy, consciousness, a concept, an event, a process, etc.

Eternity (n.): Synonymous with existence; that which is not limited by duration.


---

Existence is and nonexistence is not.

Existence is everywhere. Nonexistence is nowhere. Nonexistence does not exist, it is no thing. Every thing is something, including the concept or term nonexistence.

Existence did not begin as a beginning of existence would imply a previous state of nonexistence, and nonexistence was not, is not and cannot be. As nonexistence never was existence would not require a beginning.

Existence extends beyond creation. Creation implies a point of being created, a beginning point. Existence extends beyond creation because existence had no beginning point or point of creation.

Existence is eternal, it was not created and therefore was not intelligently designed. However, existence does concern intelligence as we possess it. At least to a certain degree.

Existence is eternal. Existence did not begin and existence will not end. Existence was not created, it was not intelligently designed, it is not needed and it has no purpose. Existence just is. We, as conscious individuals, create purpose. Much like we create good and bad, right and left, up and down.

Existence is infinite, however, our limited perspective creates an illusion of limitation. From this perspective we are inclined to limit existence, we are inclined to create measurements of existence although existence is essentially immeasurable.

Existence is infinite, existence is not limited to any particular or any specific thing. Existence is innumerable things in innumerable places in innumerable ways; things bursting and flying, floating and flowing, flipping and flopping, beating and bouncing, whizzing and whirling around. Life, consciousness is simply part of that and isn't necessarily perpetuated or eternal. Nor was it necessarily deliberately created. After all we're beating, pumping hearts, flowing blood, blinking eyes, waving hair and bouncing feet.

We are parts of eternity.

We are parts of existence.

---

Additional Notes

- All variance balances as simply being. All difference, all variation, all opposition balances as simply being, as simply existence.

- Existence is not merely defined as "that which is" because "is" would also have to be addressed which would involve perception. The matter implicitly involves perception and interaction.

- Existence is not needed. Existence is not needed as there is [not] nothing beyond existence to need or require it. Alternatively phrased, there isn't any thing beyond existence to need existence because every thing is part of existence. Existence is not needed, existence just is.

- Existence is that which can, at least partially, be perceived, but it does not necessarily need to be perceived. Things can be without being perceived. Likewise things can interact without awareness, such as waves crashing onto the shore.

- Immateriality, immaterial space is part of the structure of existence. Immateriality helps structure existence as spaces help structure sentences. The contrast of materiality, the contrast of physicality is immateriality, not nonexistence or nothing.

- It may be argued that at some point existence was finite or limited in extent. But as stated that would only be some particular point, that would only be a limited portion of existence. That would not be the totality of existence. Existence is the whole, existence is all; existence is what we perceive as the past, present and future, existence is all aspects or all portions of all things. Existence is infinite, existence is unlimited. Existence is not limited in extent; existence is not limited to any particular area, period, point, portion, quality or thing.

- It may be questioned why existence is. There is no why or reason. Why would imply a cause or a beginning. Existence is eternal and did not begin. There was no reason initiating existence as existence is eternal. There is no reason for existence. Existence simply is.

- Something and nothing cannot coexist. If there is something there is not nothing. Anywhere. Nothing or nonexistence exists only as a word, a term, a concept in relation to other things.

- Things have properties, things have qualities. Stars are bright. Icicles are cold. The automobile is aerodynamic. Nothing or nonexistence, beyond the concept or term, has no properties or qualities as it does not actually exist.


---------


Existence Is Eternal

Existence is eternal. Existence is constant. Things, parts may change; they may transform, they may shift around or reform, they may break apart or break away. But existence always is, existence is constant. The foundation of any thing, the basis of substance itself concerns being, concerns existence. The thing is. Substance is. It always concerns existence. Matter or energy, things may morph or shift around but no matter the form or arrangement it always is an expression of existence.


Existence Both Part And Whole

Existence is both part and whole. Existence as a whole is. Parts of existence are. It is. They are. All share the same commonality of existence, of being. Whole is. Parts are. They exist. They are.

Take Earth for example. There are parts of Earth and the whole Earth. Earth, the entire world, exists. However each continent, each body of water also exists. Each continent has its own name, each its own list of regulations. Each body of water has its own name. The continents are acknowledged as distinct things, the bodies of water are acknowledged as distinct things, as pieces or as parts. They also are acknowledged together as a whole, as the world or as the planet Earth. Earth's structure is comprised of several layers which also are viewed as parts or as pieces or together as the entire planet. Both parts and the whole can be and are acknowledged. This same premise applies to existence. Existence concerns both parts and the whole.

"Existence" or "being" is general, and applies to all, including parts, and the whole or entirety. "An existence", "an existing" or "a being" is specific, and applies to a particular. Both are acknowledged. In other words, both are.

A thing, although observably only part of existence, is still existence. A thing is not nonexistence. The fact a thing is [only part of] existence is implicit within context of interaction with said thing.


All Means All

Although both parts and the whole are, a part is not the whole or totality nor is the whole or totality just a part. A part is a part, the totality is the totality. A part cannot be turned into the totality, just as the totality cannot be turned into a part. A part may only represent the whole or totality or be in relation to the whole or totality. Nor can a duplicate of the totality be created. Such would be redundant, not to mention impractical. Any supposed addition to existence would still be part of existence or would still be part of the totality. In other words, there cannot be multiple totalities. Total means total, whole means whole. All means all.


Unlimited In Extent

Existence is not limited to any particular, existence is not limited in range or in scope. Existence isn't just any particular thing, existence is all things. Existence goes on and on and beyond, without limit. There is no edge to existence, no ending or beginning point to specify. There are only edges, there are only beginning and ending points to particulars or to things. To reach an edge is to reach an edge of some thing or some things, not existence entirely.

The edge of the seashore leads to the edge of the ocean; the edge of the ocean to the edge of the seashore. The edge of Earth's atmosphere leads to outer space; the edge of outer space to Earth's atmosphere, etcetera. Materiality edges into immateriality and immateriality edges into materiality. Edges of things always lead to edges of others; things give way to other things, not no things. Edges and boundaries apply only to particular things. Existence as a whole has no edge as existence is all things. Being all, existence flows seamlessly from one thing to another. Without edge, without limit.


Variance Of Existence

Parts of existence both limit and expand or give variety to existence. Parts are limited as observably they are not the entirety of existence, they do not concern the full scope of existence or the qualities of other things. Yet at the same time parts of existence give variety to existence; their uniqueness contributes variance to existence. For example the grittiness, the composition of sand contributes variance to existence as it contrasts the wetness, the composition of water. The water, as part of existence, perpetuates existence beyond just the grittiness or composition of sand. Both give variety to existence with their contrasting qualities. Simultaneously sand limits the extent of water, water limits the extent of sand.


Nonexistence Cannot Be

Nonexistence cannot be referenced because nonexistence is not and cannot be. Only things existent, only existence can be referenced. Absence of a thing or things may be declared, but this still concerns reference in relation to existent things. For example, Bob may be absent from class, but Bob is not nonexistent. Nor does Bob's absence create a gap of nonexistence in the classroom as the room is still completely filled with or comprised of things, be it air, desks, other students, teachers, etcetera. Absence concerns reference to a subject, to an existent thing and its location. The subject of reference is Bob, is the existent thing, along with its location. The subject of reference is not nonexistence or nothing; neither nonexistence nor nothing have location or presence to be referenced in such a way.

The very term "nothing" concerns reference to things. The concept or idea of nothing exists only in its relation to, and is based on, other existent things. "No thing" concerns direct reference to a thing or things. Attempting to reference nothing or nonexistence always fails as something is invariably referenced. The attempt to reference nothing or nonexistence itself results in reference to things: mental constructs or concepts of nothing, of nonexistence, or of nothingness, along with the words or terms nothing, or nonexistence, or nothingness themselves, all of which are things and are indeed existent. The words "nothing", "nonexistence" and "nothingness" are obvious contradictions as they are all observably things. Every reference is to some existent thing; nonexistence is not and cannot be.


The Significance Of Perception

Perception or consciousness is part of the basis of defining existence because conscious entities, such as ourselves, are who this issue matters to. Existence, things can be without consciousness or awareness, but consciousness or awareness must be included because that's what we are. For our purposes existence is that which is, or can, at least partially, be perceived. It involves perception both because perception or consciousness is part of existence and because the issue intimately concerns conscious entities. It implicitly involves perception or consciousness because that is the process used for such inquiry and exchange.

Interactivity, or the ability of things to interact, or the fact that things or phenomena interact, also plays a significant role in the definition of existence. It frees the philosophy from a purely biological, conscious perspective. Chemicals interact. Atoms interact. Protons, electrons all interact on nonconscious, nonbiological levels.


On Becoming

Becoming is a process, becoming is in essence development. Becoming could be viewed as dynamics of things, a process pertaining to things, similar to change.

Becoming is simply a process of existence, a process pertaining to individuals or parts of existence. Individuals, things become, develop or change into other things. A caterpillar, a thing, exists and becomes another, a butterfly. A student becomes a teacher, etcetera.

Existence, that is all things, cannot suddenly vanish into nothing. Nor can they suddenly appear from nothing. Existence cannot suddenly become nonexistence just as nonexistence cannot suddenly become existence. Existence always is. In this sense existence does not become. Existence, generally speaking, is not becoming and did not become. Existence is eternal. However becoming, as a process or development, can pertain to parts of existence.


Immateriality

Immaterial indicates intangible things or impalpable things. Immaterial things cannot be physically touched like typical material objects. Truth and philosophy are examples of immateriality. Space, which in essence is volume, can be considered material or immaterial depending on the subject.

An ocean is an example of material space. An ocean, or at least part of one, can be touched and is obviously tangible. An ocean provides material resistance because it consists of densely arranged molecules and atoms. Relatively the vacuum of outer space is considered immaterial space. The vacuum provides no resistance as it concerns minimal molecules and atomic arrangements allowing material bodies motion.

The vacuum does not concern matter in the terrestrial sense. The vacuum concerns quantum fields, radiation and sparingly atoms or molecules. Too few molecules are present to form tangible, solid material. Pure immaterial space would theoretically concern no atoms, no molecules and no radiation. The idea or concept of space itself is conceptual and thus immaterial.


Smallest Thing

Whether there is a smallest thing or not is rather inconsequential. Even if there were a smallest thing, a smallest object, a smallest particle, etcetera, it would still be a thing, it would still be something, it would still be part of existence. A smallest thing would not create a gap of nonexistence. Existence would still be infinite, existence would still be ubiquitous; existence would still flow seamlessly from one thing to another.

A smallest thing would not necessarily indicate limitation of existence, as in limitation of existence's size or extent; rather it would indicate limitation of that particular thing, limitation of the size or extent of that specific thing. It would indicate limitations of observation or ability of the observer. Existence is infinite in size and extent; existence includes every thing and is not limited to or by size of particulars. Nor is existence actually limited due to limitations of observation or ability.


Eternal Life

As existence never began, as existence had no starting point things wouldn't need to advance or develop from a beginning. There wouldn't be a beginning to need to develop from. Things would always be existent and could exist at any level of development at any given time. This essentially means life, or consciousness, could be eternal. This also relates to the premise that life may not have been [deliberately] created. Life, in the sense of being eternal, would not have been created nor would it have originated from a specific starting point.

This philosophy also accommodates ideas concerning abiogenesis, in which case life isn't deliberately or intelligently created but rather develops gradually as a result of environmental circumstances and events. It also accommodates ideas concerning panspermia, in which case life, or its required components, are distributed by comets, meteorites and other celestial bodies amidst their interactions.


Conclusions

The philosophy presented herein illustrates the commonality we all share. In fact the commonality all things share. As demonstrated throughout centuries past various religions, ideologies and ideologues have served largely to confound, to divide, to stoke the fires of conflict in the world rather than to unite. Optimistically philosophy, such as the one presented here, can serve to clarify, can serve to reconcile these ideas as well as improve understanding and community throughout the world and beyond.


https://linktr.ee/daniellavender
Of course it is. It's implicit. Regardless of which theory of time prevails.
Age
Posts: 27841
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Existence Is Infinite

Post by Age »

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:05 am
Age wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 4:34 am
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Fri Apr 18, 2025 11:38 am
Existence and Universe, whatever they are, may be, but everywhere there was, is and shall be, all the time there was, is and shall be, was, is and shall be existence. Of which our blip of a universe is an infinitesimal part.
What has some insignificant part of THE Universe, which you refer to as 'your blip', got to do with any thing, here?

Now,
'Universe', to some, means or refers to, All-there-is; Everything; Totality. So, that is what the word, 'Universe' is, exactly, here.

'Existence', to some, is the word used to refer to 'Being', (in this place), which is 'known' and that the 'I' in every human body is Aware of. So, that is what the word, 'Existence', is, exactly, here.

There is only One Universe and One Existence, which 'I' am Aware of. If 'you' know or are aware of any others, then will 'you' please inform 'us' of them?

Once more, this One and only Universe, which Exists, is infinite, spatially, and, eternal, temporally. And, again, this can not be refuted by any one.

And, if any one would like the irrefutable proof for this claim, then, as always, allow 'us' to just have a Truly open and honest discussion.
I reason that universes come and go in the infinite multiverse.
Besides to "yourself", when and where have you 'reasoned' that so-called 'universes' come and go in some so-called 'infinite multiverse'?

And, how, exactly, can these so-called 'universes' 'come and go' and where, exactly, do they 'come and go' to and from?

Also, how are you defining the 'infinite multiverse' words, exactly?
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:05 am I don't know about this Universe of yours.
And, you never will while you never seek out and obtain actual clarification and understanding, and thus actual clarity.
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:05 am Cosmos can have that connotation. The all.
Great. Can any other words, as well?
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:05 am I don't refute your One and only Universe, which Exists, is infinite, spatially, and, eternal, temporally.
Simply because you can not.
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:05 am I'm talking about existence and universes.
I have talked about 'Existence', you have not replied to 'that'.

As for these so called 'universes', how are you defining 'them', exactly?
Martin Peter Clarke
Posts: 1617
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2025 9:54 pm

Re: Existence Is Infinite

Post by Martin Peter Clarke »

Age wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:24 am
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:05 am
Age wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 4:34 am

What has some insignificant part of THE Universe, which you refer to as 'your blip', got to do with any thing, here?

Now,
'Universe', to some, means or refers to, All-there-is; Everything; Totality. So, that is what the word, 'Universe' is, exactly, here.

'Existence', to some, is the word used to refer to 'Being', (in this place), which is 'known' and that the 'I' in every human body is Aware of. So, that is what the word, 'Existence', is, exactly, here.

There is only One Universe and One Existence, which 'I' am Aware of. If 'you' know or are aware of any others, then will 'you' please inform 'us' of them?

Once more, this One and only Universe, which Exists, is infinite, spatially, and, eternal, temporally. And, again, this can not be refuted by any one.

And, if any one would like the irrefutable proof for this claim, then, as always, allow 'us' to just have a Truly open and honest discussion.
I reason that universes come and go in the infinite multiverse.
Besides to "yourself", when and where have you 'reasoned' that so-called 'universes' come and go in some so-called 'infinite multiverse'?
I can't quite parse that. The first clause doesn't seem to be connected. And multiverse theory is nothing to do with me.

And, how, exactly, can these so-called 'universes' 'come and go' and where, exactly, do they 'come and go' to and from?
We don't know. But they certainly come. And when they go is just a matter... of time. Whatever that is. My personal favourite for how they come is by the collision of 4-D m-branes in bulk, minimally 5-D, hyperspace. And they go, at most, by the isolation of every quantum from every other, by the currently accelerating expansion of space. I follow that reasoning. The following is mine. nothing else is of course.

Also, how are you defining the 'infinite multiverse' words, exactly?
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:05 am I don't know about this Universe of yours.
And, you never will while you never seek out and obtain actual clarification and understanding, and thus actual clarity.
I'd never do that.
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:05 am Cosmos can have that connotation. The all.
Great. Can any other words, as well?
I don't know of any, but there again. I'm a most ignorant person.
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:05 am I don't refute your One and only Universe, which Exists, is infinite, spatially, and, eternal, temporally.
Simply because you can not.
Indeed, it's uniquely, inaccessibly, untransferably yours.
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:05 am I'm talking about existence and universes.
I have talked about 'Existence', you have not replied to 'that'.
I can't. It's yours. I can only reflect on mere existence.

As for these so called 'universes', how are you defining 'them', exactly?
The plural of universe.
Age
Posts: 27841
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Existence Is Infinite

Post by Age »

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:53 am
Age wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:24 am
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:05 am

I reason that universes come and go in the infinite multiverse.
Besides to "yourself", when and where have you 'reasoned' that so-called 'universes' come and go in some so-called 'infinite multiverse'?
I can't quite parse that. The first clause doesn't seem to be connected. And multiverse theory is nothing to do with me.
So, why you say, 'you reason', really, you have not, correct?
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:53 am

And, how, exactly, can these so-called 'universes' 'come and go' and where, exactly, do they 'come and go' to and from?
We don't know.
So, if none of 'you' know, then why even say and claim that 'that' is what happens?
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:53 am But they certainly come.
Based on 'what', exactly?

Please inform 'the readers', here.
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:53 am And when they go is just a matter... of time.
If really, what is 'this' based upon, exactly?
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:53 am Whatever that is.
Sounds like you are just making more assumptions, based on no actual thing at all.
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:53 am My personal favourite for how they come is by the collision of 4-D m-branes in bulk, minimally 5-D, hyperspace.
Okay, but besides being absolutely impossible to prove, let alone it even being able to happen 'theoretically', the fact that 'this' could not even happen and occur 'empirically' rules out this assumption, theory, and guess made up by some human beings.

And, if you can not even explain how these so-called 'universes' could be 'separated', 'logically', let alone 'actually', then why are you even bringing up just the made up imaginations of some people, only?
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:53 am And they go, at most, by the isolation of every quantum from every other, by the currently accelerating expansion of space.
There really is a lot more you are in need of learning, comprehending, and understanding, here.
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:53 am I follow that reasoning.
So-called 'reasoning' based upon things that could not even happen 'logically', let alone 'empirically', is not 'actual reasoning'.

Made up stories that could not even be a possibility are, really, not worth repeating, here.
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:53 am The following is mine. nothing else is of course.

Also, how are you defining the 'infinite multiverse' words, exactly?
Once again, 'we' have another one who provides absolutely nothing at all.

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:05 am
Age wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:24 am
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:05 amI don't know about this Universe of yours.
And, you never will while you never seek out and obtain actual clarification and understanding, and thus actual clarity.
I'd never do that.
Which is why you are a self-proclaimed, 'most ignorant person'.
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:05 am


Cosmos can have that connotation. The all.
Great. Can any other words, as well?
I don't know of any, but there again. I'm a most ignorant person.
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:05 am I don't refute your One and only Universe, which Exists, is infinite, spatially, and, eternal, temporally.
Simply because you can not.
Indeed, it's uniquely, inaccessibly, untransferably yours.[/quote]

you have to be joking, here.


Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:53 am
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:05 am I'm talking about existence and universes.
I have talked about 'Existence', you have not replied to 'that'.
I can't.
This is obviously absolutely False
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 9:53 am It's yours. I can only reflect on mere existence.

As for these so called 'universes', how are you defining 'them', exactly?
The plural of universe.
And, how do you define, 'universe', exactly?
Martin Peter Clarke
Posts: 1617
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2025 9:54 pm

Re: Existence Is Infinite

Post by Martin Peter Clarke »

Cheerio foe.
Age
Posts: 27841
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Existence Is Infinite

Post by Age »

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sat Apr 19, 2025 12:17 pm Cheerio foe.
Once more, 'we' have 'another one' who can not back up and support what it claimed, here.
Martin Peter Clarke
Posts: 1617
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2025 9:54 pm

Re: Existence Is Infinite

Post by Martin Peter Clarke »

What is one to do? One comes to have ones tyres kicked. Socratically. One desires to do this in a spirit of... mutuality. Love. But one finds oneself tilting at windmills in the same old way. Direct. So, one blocks each as they whack-a-moly pop up. And the landscape gets sparser and sparser. The internet is a chaos sink, or is it a saddle? Both. It draws one in. And one falls off. Site after site after site. BioLogos. Richard Dawkins site, which has rid itself of its forum. Ship of Fools. When will one wise up?
User avatar
Ben JS
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2022 10:38 am
Location: Australia

Re: Existence Is Infinite

Post by Ben JS »

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sun Apr 20, 2025 9:21 am What is one to do? One comes to have ones tyres kicked. Socratically. One desires to do this in a spirit of... mutuality. Love. But one finds oneself tilting at windmills in the same old way. Direct. So, one blocks each as they whack-a-moly pop up. And the landscape gets sparser and sparser. The internet is a chaos sink, or is it a saddle? Both. It draws one in. And one falls off. Site after site after site. BioLogos. Richard Dawkins site, which has rid itself of its forum. Ship of Fools. When will one wise up?
If I am not yet on that list,
I say this:

You either have to nurture wisdom in others,
or find the tiny pockets where wisdom has already been nurtured.

It appears the majority of forces create discord and noise,
which permeate along all tendrils of culture -
my paranoia says intentionally so.
(divide and conquer)

In order to preserve clarity and a conducive environment for construction,
one typically has to isolate or shield themselves from the broader environment's racket.

I don't expect you to remain here long,
and that's completely fair.
There is noise here, but perhaps workable.

Best of luck, regardless of outcome.
Martin Peter Clarke
Posts: 1617
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2025 9:54 pm

Re: Existence Is Infinite

Post by Martin Peter Clarke »

Ben JS wrote: Sun Apr 20, 2025 9:53 am
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sun Apr 20, 2025 9:21 am What is one to do? One comes to have ones tyres kicked. Socratically. One desires to do this in a spirit of... mutuality. Love. But one finds oneself tilting at windmills in the same old way. Direct. So, one blocks each as they whack-a-moly pop up. And the landscape gets sparser and sparser. The internet is a chaos sink, or is it a saddle? Both. It draws one in. And one falls off. Site after site after site. BioLogos. Richard Dawkins site, which has rid itself of its forum. Ship of Fools. When will one wise up?
If I am not yet on that list,
I say this:

You either have to nurture wisdom in others,
or find the tiny pockets where wisdom has already been nurtured.

It appears the majority of forces create discord and noise,
which permeate along all tendrils of culture -
my paranoia says intentionally so.
(divide and conquer)

In order to preserve clarity and a conducive environment for construction,
one typically has to isolate or shield themselves from the broader environment's racket.

I don't expect you to remain here long,
and that's completely fair.
There is noise here, but perhaps workable.

Best of luck, regardless of outcome.
You won't be Ben JS. The very opposite. Thank you very much. You give me hope. Martin

PS Love the triquetra.

PPS I am a compulsive old fool, I poke shit house rats in the insane forlorn hope that they just stop for a moment and we can actually engage.

PPPS I resonate with your paranoia, this is all part of the ruling class' laughing all the way to the bank.
Martin Peter Clarke
Posts: 1617
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2025 9:54 pm

Re: Existence Is Infinite

Post by Martin Peter Clarke »

Ooh, and back to universes. Even if our expanding AND diminishing observable universe, and its, at least, two orders of magnitude larger, and growing, no longer observable shell, are part of an infinite universe, there are, of course, infinite infinite universes. No further regress is necessary.
Age
Posts: 27841
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Existence Is Infinite

Post by Age »

Imagine believing that you can claim things, like, for example, there are 'universes', but not even being able to define what A 'universe' even is, at all, let alone exactly, and then 'trying to' ridicule others who just challenge you by just asking very simple questions for clarity.

It is like people like 'this' have no comprehension nor understanding at all that just because they believe some thing is true never means that 'that thing' is actually true.

Now, the Universe, Itself, like Existence, Itself, is infinite, as well as eternal.

Like Reality, Itself, there is only One Universe, and One Existence.

Now, once again, if absolutely any one would like the irrefutable proof for these Facts, then let 'us' just have a discussion where you can question and challenge me as much as you.

See, unlike people like "martin peter clarke" 'I' certainly do not 'run away' nor hide from questions and challenges, here.
Age
Posts: 27841
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Existence Is Infinite

Post by Age »

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sun Apr 20, 2025 10:31 am
Ben JS wrote: Sun Apr 20, 2025 9:53 am
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sun Apr 20, 2025 9:21 am What is one to do? One comes to have ones tyres kicked. Socratically. One desires to do this in a spirit of... mutuality. Love. But one finds oneself tilting at windmills in the same old way. Direct. So, one blocks each as they whack-a-moly pop up. And the landscape gets sparser and sparser. The internet is a chaos sink, or is it a saddle? Both. It draws one in. And one falls off. Site after site after site. BioLogos. Richard Dawkins site, which has rid itself of its forum. Ship of Fools. When will one wise up?
If I am not yet on that list,
I say this:

You either have to nurture wisdom in others,
or find the tiny pockets where wisdom has already been nurtured.

It appears the majority of forces create discord and noise,
which permeate along all tendrils of culture -
my paranoia says intentionally so.
(divide and conquer)

In order to preserve clarity and a conducive environment for construction,
one typically has to isolate or shield themselves from the broader environment's racket.

I don't expect you to remain here long,
and that's completely fair.
There is noise here, but perhaps workable.

Best of luck, regardless of outcome.
You won't be Ben JS. The very opposite. Thank you very much. You give me hope. Martin

PS Love the triquetra.

PPS I am a compulsive old fool, I poke shit house rats in the insane forlorn hope that they just stop for a moment and we can actually engage.
'This one' has to be joking, here, right?

'I' 'poke' questions at its most insane claim that there are 'universes', and instead of 'stopping' and 'engaging', by answering and clarifying, it is 'the one' who just keeps on 'running away'
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sun Apr 20, 2025 10:31 am PPPS I resonate with your paranoia, this is all part of the ruling class' laughing all the way to the bank.
Age
Posts: 27841
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Existence Is Infinite

Post by Age »

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Tue Apr 22, 2025 8:46 am Ooh, and back to universes. Even if our expanding AND diminishing observable universe, and its, at least, two orders of magnitude larger, and growing, no longer observable shell, are part of an infinite universe, there are, of course, infinite infinite universes.
So, well to 'this one' anyway, there are two types of 'universes', one that is not infinite, and, one that is infinite. Also, there is, laughingly, one universe that is 'theirs', whoever or whatever the 'our' word is referring to, exactly?
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Tue Apr 22, 2025 8:46 am No further regress is necessary.
This statement and claim could not be any more ridiculous, nonsensical, absurd, illogical, and just downright stupid, especially considering what it is in relation to, exactly.

This one actually believes that it can just state and claim:

There are 'universes', one universe is ours, one that is expanding, one that is limited, one which is a part of an infinite universe, and that there are so-called infinite 'infinite universes'. And, that no further 'regress' is necessary.

For absolutely any one to just think these things, let alone believe these things, and to think or believe that 'that claim' is all that is 'necessary' would have to be one who could not be more delusional, nor more stupid.

And, the irrefutable proof that 'that one' could not be more delusional, nor more stupid, exists within 'that one's' inability to back up and support its actual claim at all.

Has 'this one' backed up and supported its claims, here, in any way at all?

If yes, then where and when, exactly?
Impenitent
Posts: 5775
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Existence Is Infinite

Post by Impenitent »

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Sun Apr 20, 2025 9:21 am What is one to do? One comes to have ones tyres kicked. Socratically. One desires to do this in a spirit of... mutuality. Love. But one finds oneself tilting at windmills in the same old way. Direct. So, one blocks each as they whack-a-moly pop up. And the landscape gets sparser and sparser. The internet is a chaos sink, or is it a saddle? Both. It draws one in. And one falls off. Site after site after site. BioLogos. Richard Dawkins site, which has rid itself of its forum. Ship of Fools. When will one wise up?
Sancho will be hard to discover -

-Imp
Post Reply