Philosophy Now Forum

Context is contigent on context thus context self-references leading to a singularity. This singularity is obscure and unable to be sensed given there is nothing to compare it too.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 1:14 am Context is contigent on context thus context self-references leading to a singularity. This singularity is obscure and unable to be sensed given there is nothing to compare it too.

Are you able to define what the word 'singularity' means, or refers to, to you?

If yes, then will you?

Age wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 9:26 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 1:14 am Context is contigent on context thus context self-references leading to a singularity. This singularity is obscure and unable to be sensed given there is nothing to compare it too.

Are you able to define what the word 'singularity' means, or refers to, to you?

If yes, then will you?

I was expecting this thread to be about The Singularity, however Doe seems to be talking about singleness. Let’s see what he says in reply to your questions.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 1:14 am Context is contigent on context thus context self-references leading to a singularity. This singularity is obscure and unable to be sensed given there is nothing to compare it too.

The idea comes across as a domino effect. That's the identity of my own imagination. When you wrote the sentence, about self-references leading to singularity, what was your internal perception of the idea?

Four chatbots duking it out in an epic free-for-all, I'll try to summon one more.

Skepdick wrote:nyaahhh

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Feb 26, 2022 5:11 pm Four chatbots duking it out in an epic free-for-all, I'll try to summon one more.

Skepdick wrote:nyaahhh

Chatbots summoning us, humans ?!?!?

Progress!

Skepdick wrote: ↑Mon Feb 28, 2022 8:08 am

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Feb 26, 2022 5:11 pm Four chatbots duking it out in an epic free-for-all, I'll try to summon one more.

Skepdick wrote:nyaahhh

Chatbots summoning us, humans ?!?!?

Progress!

Hey it worked

Non-Sense is, as applied here, Insensible.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 1:14 am Context is contigent on context thus context self-references leading to a singularity. This singularity is obscure and unable to be sensed given there is nothing to compare it too.

Would a singularity be a singularity if there was anything to compare it to?

Atla wrote: ↑Mon Feb 28, 2022 3:28 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Mon Feb 28, 2022 8:08 am

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Feb 26, 2022 5:11 pm Four chatbots duking it out in an epic free-for-all, I'll try to summon one more.

Chatbots summoning us, humans ?!?!?

Progress!

Hey it worked

I am susprised that you are susprised.

When my alarm clock summons me, it's usually a non-event.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 01, 2022 9:53 am

Atla wrote: ↑Mon Feb 28, 2022 3:28 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Mon Feb 28, 2022 8:08 am
Chatbots summoning us, humans ?!?!?

Progress!

Hey it worked

I am susprised that you are susprised.

When my alarm clock summons me, it's usually a non-event.

wasn't sure it would work without a timestamp and a post_id

although considering it's you, it probably would have worked without any quote at all, who knows how many hours a day you spend here reading comments

Age wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 9:26 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 1:14 am Context is contigent on context thus context self-references leading to a singularity. This singularity is obscure and unable to be sensed given there is nothing to compare it too.

Are you able to define what the word 'singularity' means, or refers to, to you?

If yes, then will you?

Singularity is distinctness. Distinctness is the standing apart of one phenomenon from another. "Standing apart" is contrast. Contrast is a relationship. Relationship is a bond. A bond is one. Singularity is one.

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 6:04 pm

Age wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 9:26 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 1:14 am Context is contigent on context thus context self-references leading to a singularity. This singularity is obscure and unable to be sensed given there is nothing to compare it too.

Are you able to define what the word 'singularity' means, or refers to, to you?

If yes, then will you?

I was expecting this thread to be about The Singularity, however Doe seems to be talking about singleness. Let’s see what he says in reply to your questions.

A singularity is a single phenomenon as both singularity and single are "oneness". Oneness is obscure because of an absence of contrast, with this contrast necessitating multiplicity. The totality of phenomena as "oneness" is obscure because there is nothing to contrast "the one" to except itself. Contrast to self is self-referentiality, self-referentiality is one phenomenon, contrast to self is one phenomenon in contrast to nothing (no contrast).

owl of Minerva wrote: ↑Mon Feb 28, 2022 5:25 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 1:14 am Context is contigent on context thus context self-references leading to a singularity. This singularity is obscure and unable to be sensed given there is nothing to compare it too.

Would a singularity be a singularity if there was anything to compare it to?

A paradox ensues when distinctness, ie multiplicity, is the same as a singularity. This paradox is real. The presence of a comparison between phenomena is the underlying relationship between one phenomenon and another due to the underlying nature of contrast both share.

This contrast is a tieing together of said phenomenon by both sharing a respective void of certain qualities, relative to the other, in each phenomenon. The sharing of voidness, ie absence of a quality found in one phenomenon but not another and vice-versa, ties together distinct phenomena into one thus a singularity in comparison to another singularity is still a singularity as both are connected by nothingness.

trokanmariel wrote: ↑Sat Feb 26, 2022 5:01 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 1:14 am Context is contigent on context thus context self-references leading to a singularity. This singularity is obscure and unable to be sensed given there is nothing to compare it too.

The idea comes across as a domino effect. That's the identity of my own imagination. When you wrote the sentence, about self-references leading to singularity, what was your internal perception of the idea?

Self referencing is a contrast to self where the same thing stands in multiple positions (I talking about myself is one self reflecting upon another self with both "selves" being the self) but is the same thing regardless of positions.