Image as Foundation of Phenomena.
Posted: Tue Aug 21, 2018 10:09 pm
"I" as a limit which composes all phenomena, fold's through itself across time and space through continual relations in which the "I" multiplies and divides with these multiple "I's" being an extension of the one "I am" as an approximation of it.
"I think therefore I am"
Observes the act of thinking as an action that determines the "I", but it is the "action" that determines the existance of the "I". This action does not have to be limited to "thinking", it can be any action as a form of "movement".
In these respects "I think therefore I am" can be replaced with just "I am" in the respect "am" universalizes all possible actions as "being" itself.
The "I" has both subjective and objective elements which determine it, and the "I" as the relation of these subjective and objective elements observes that what we consider of the "I" is not merely limited to the individual but exists through groups of people (multiple "I"'s.)
The "I" is defined both through the self and the group and in these respects the "I" shares a nature of being unified in itself and existing through multiple extensions.
What we understand of the subjective self (the individual "I") is form from it's relations to other "I"'s and in these respects maintains a degree of objectivity in the respect these other's "I"'s as both seperate and disinterested form certain boundaries of the subjective experience itself and in effect objectify it.
So for example the subjective experience of "I" in me going to get something to eat, is determined by the nature of other "I"'s providing food service (cooking the food, cashier, etc.) which in itself is objective in the respect, that whether or not "I" experience them directly these "emotionally detached" existing actions effectively form my own experience. The objective act of the food being cooked, or the money being processed all form the subjective experience of the "I". Even the formation of objective truths, by observing boundaries of existence through "law's" or "theories", effect me subjectively (such as the objective argum
"I think therefore I am"
Observes the act of thinking as an action that determines the "I", but it is the "action" that determines the existance of the "I". This action does not have to be limited to "thinking", it can be any action as a form of "movement".
In these respects "I think therefore I am" can be replaced with just "I am" in the respect "am" universalizes all possible actions as "being" itself.
The "I" has both subjective and objective elements which determine it, and the "I" as the relation of these subjective and objective elements observes that what we consider of the "I" is not merely limited to the individual but exists through groups of people (multiple "I"'s.)
The "I" is defined both through the self and the group and in these respects the "I" shares a nature of being unified in itself and existing through multiple extensions.
What we understand of the subjective self (the individual "I") is form from it's relations to other "I"'s and in these respects maintains a degree of objectivity in the respect these other's "I"'s as both seperate and disinterested form certain boundaries of the subjective experience itself and in effect objectify it.
So for example the subjective experience of "I" in me going to get something to eat, is determined by the nature of other "I"'s providing food service (cooking the food, cashier, etc.) which in itself is objective in the respect, that whether or not "I" experience them directly these "emotionally detached" existing actions effectively form my own experience. The objective act of the food being cooked, or the money being processed all form the subjective experience of the "I". Even the formation of objective truths, by observing boundaries of existence through "law's" or "theories", effect me subjectively (such as the objective argum