Page 4 of 9
Re: Counting as grounded in Assumption of Void
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:05 pm
by Eodnhoj7
Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 10:28 am
Assuming a void is the same as the eternal metaphysical question: Do holes exist? Do voids exist?
You are assuming assumption is a question.
Obviously they do! We have words for them. Use is meaning. If you are using the word 'void' it means something.
Actually void as a word is just an empty context that progression to another context. Thus the word is just empty context.
/color]
Void means the same thing as Null in computer science.
It still represented/stored in memory and therefore Null references SOMETHING.
Void references inversion on one phenomena into another, and in itself is empty of context as it is directed to further definitions which are assumed. Assumption is empty and merely a point. Void is thus a word that is contradictory in nature.
Trying to process Null causes Null pointer exception.
Lastly - if 'void' is only assumed - can you still count it? How many voids are there? I am guessing - at least 1.
it would require voiding void into a phenomena, but this phenomena would be voided into one and many further phenomena. We only observed void through the multiplicity of phenomena under movement and change.
Re: Counting as grounded in Assumption of Void
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:07 pm
by Skepdick
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 5:59 pm
Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 12:12 pm
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 12:10 pm
Assumptions can't answer question about assumptions because they have no consciousness to know.
I am not answering questions. I am asking question.
How many assumptions are there?
How many consciousnesses are there?
How many knowers are there?
About 7.53 billion
Plus minus 1
The questioner are neither right nor wrong as the answers to the questions
1. The answer would be assumed.
2. This requires consciousness quantifying itself perpetually if consciousness quantifies.
3. This would require know concepts as concepts, as concepts.
The answer to all three is one and many.
That's why coherentists reject foundationalism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coherentism
As an epistemological theory, coherentism opposes dogmatic foundationalism and also infinitism through its insistence on definitions.
Re: Counting as grounded in Assumption of Void
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:08 pm
by Skepdick
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:05 pm
You are assuming assumption is a question.
And you are assuming that assumption is a foundation.
Re: Counting as grounded in Assumption of Void
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:19 pm
by Eodnhoj7
Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:07 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 5:59 pm
Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 12:12 pm
I am not answering questions. I am asking question.
How many assumptions are there?
How many consciousnesses are there?
How many knowers are there?
About 7.53 billion
Plus minus 1
The questioner are neither right nor wrong as the answers to the questions
1. The answer would be assumed.
2. This requires consciousness quantifying itself perpetually if consciousness quantifies.
3. This would require know concepts as concepts, as concepts.
The answer to all three is one and many.
That's why coherentists reject foundationalism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coherentism
As an epistemological theory, coherentism opposes dogmatic foundationalism and also infinitism through its insistence on definitions.
Definition through context is its foundation then, and is empty in itself.
Re: Counting as grounded in Assumption of Void
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:19 pm
by Eodnhoj7
Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:08 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:05 pm
You are assuming assumption is a question.
And you are assuming that assumption is a foundation.
That is an assumption, thus a definition.
Re: Counting as grounded in Assumption of Void
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:25 pm
by Skepdick
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:19 pm
That is an assumption, thus a definition.
Is there anything that is not an assumption?
If your answer is "no" then your religion is complete.
Re: Counting as grounded in Assumption of Void
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:27 pm
by Eodnhoj7
Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:25 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:19 pm
That is an assumption, thus a definition.
Is there anything that is not an assumption?
If your answer is "no" then your religion is complete.
You are assuming assumption is strictly belief. No is an assumption. Assumption is void.
Re: Counting as grounded in Assumption of Void
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:41 pm
by Skepdick
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:27 pm
You are assuming assumption is strictly belief. No is an assumption. Assumption is void.
What is void?
Re: Counting as grounded in Assumption of Void
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:42 pm
by Dontaskme
Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:41 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:27 pm
You are assuming assumption is strictly belief. No is an assumption. Assumption is void.
What is void?
Identification is life identifying.
Every problem/question can be brought back to this initial problem/question: who am I?
Re: Counting as grounded in Assumption of Void
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:43 pm
by Skepdick
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:42 pm
Every problem/question can be brought back to this initial problem/question: who am I?
I am Skepdick. What is your name?
Re: Counting as grounded in Assumption of Void
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:47 pm
by Eodnhoj7
Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:41 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:27 pm
You are assuming assumption is strictly belief. No is an assumption. Assumption is void.
What is void?
An assumption which is void.
Re: Counting as grounded in Assumption of Void
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:48 pm
by Eodnhoj7
Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:43 pm
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:42 pm
Every problem/question can be brought back to this initial problem/question: who am I?
I am Skepdick. What is your name?
And that name is void in light of the other names...
Re: Counting as grounded in Assumption of Void
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:50 pm
by Skepdick
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:48 pm
And that name is void in light of the other names...
Says who?
Re: Counting as grounded in Assumption of Void
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:54 pm
by Eodnhoj7
Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:50 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:48 pm
And that name is void in light of the other names...
Says who?
Anti-foundationalists.
Re: Counting as grounded in Assumption of Void
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:55 pm
by Skepdick
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:54 pm
Anti-foundationalists.
Which anti-foundationalist said that?