The Unity Paradox
Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2022 11:17 pm
1. Unity is the connection of parts.
2. Parts necessitate a separation.
2. Parts necessitate a separation.
And yet those things that are separate, are connected too.
Philosophy Now Forum
For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
The Unity Paradox
Page 1 of 2
Re: The Unity Paradox
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2022 4:20 pm
Re: The Unity Paradox
Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2022 12:27 am
Elmer was here
-Imp
-Imp
Re: The Unity Paradox
Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2022 4:28 am
'Parts' do NOT necessarily necessitate 'a separation'.
But what does NECESSITATE 'a separation' IS 'a concept', or 'view'.
So, 'separation' and/or 'parts' exist in 'thought' ONLY, and ALONE.
There is only One 'Thing', ALONE, which is 'separated' through thought and names/labels ALONE.
But this form of conceptual 'separation' was a necessary proponent for 'you', human beings, to make 'sense' of 'the world', in order so that thee One and ONLY 'I' could come to KNOW thy Self.
'I' needed a species, with the ability to gather, store, and recall 'information/knowledge' to evolve into 'being' so that 'I' could come to KNOW, EXACTLY, 'Who (and what) 'I' am', and this is where 'you', human beings, come into the Picture. 'you' are the only KNOWN species with the ability to learn, understand, and reason absolutely ANY and EVERY thing, and with the ability to store and recall all of that knowledge and information.
Re: The Unity Paradox
Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2022 11:25 pm
Yes...through them sharing the underlying quality of separation.Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑Sat Sep 17, 2022 4:20 pmAnd yet those things that are separate, are connected too.
Re: The Unity Paradox
Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2022 11:29 pm
1. Conception/view is a part of reality as they exist.Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 4:28 am'Parts' do NOT necessarily necessitate 'a separation'.
But what does NECESSITATE 'a separation' IS 'a concept', or 'view'.
So, 'separation' and/or 'parts' exist in 'thought' ONLY, and ALONE.
There is only One 'Thing', ALONE, which is 'separated' through thought and names/labels ALONE.
But this form of conceptual 'separation' was a necessary proponent for 'you', human beings, to make 'sense' of 'the world', in order so that thee One and ONLY 'I' could come to KNOW thy Self.
'I' needed a species, with the ability to gather, store, and recall 'information/knowledge' to evolve into 'being' so that 'I' could come to KNOW, EXACTLY, 'Who (and what) 'I' am', and this is where 'you', human beings, come into the Picture. 'you' are the only KNOWN species with the ability to learn, understand, and reason absolutely ANY and EVERY thing, and with the ability to store and recall all of that knowledge and information.
2. You are separating conception/view from reality thus not all is one (given conceptions/views exist).
3. A part is a distinction and as a distinction necessitates a separation.
Re: The Unity Paradox
Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2022 12:15 am
What IS 'reality', to you, EXACTLY?Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 11:29 pm1. Conception/view is a part of reality as they exist.Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 4:28 am'Parts' do NOT necessarily necessitate 'a separation'.
But what does NECESSITATE 'a separation' IS 'a concept', or 'view'.
So, 'separation' and/or 'parts' exist in 'thought' ONLY, and ALONE.
There is only One 'Thing', ALONE, which is 'separated' through thought and names/labels ALONE.
But this form of conceptual 'separation' was a necessary proponent for 'you', human beings, to make 'sense' of 'the world', in order so that thee One and ONLY 'I' could come to KNOW thy Self.
'I' needed a species, with the ability to gather, store, and recall 'information/knowledge' to evolve into 'being' so that 'I' could come to KNOW, EXACTLY, 'Who (and what) 'I' am', and this is where 'you', human beings, come into the Picture. 'you' are the only KNOWN species with the ability to learn, understand, and reason absolutely ANY and EVERY thing, and with the ability to store and recall all of that knowledge and information.
I am NOT doing what 'you' CLAIM here. Thus, the rest is moot.
A 'part' is a conception/perception ONLY. So, the 'distinction' exists in 'thought' ALONE.
The word 'distinction' OBVIOUSLY implies or infers 'a separation'. So, it is 'thought', itself, which necessitates 'separates'. But this just then goes back to HOW the Mind and the brain work, EXACTLY.
Re: The Unity Paradox
Posted: Tue Oct 04, 2022 8:26 pm
1. Reality is.Age wrote: ↑Fri Sep 30, 2022 12:15 amWhat IS 'reality', to you, EXACTLY?Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 11:29 pm1. Conception/view is a part of reality as they exist.Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 4:28 am
'Parts' do NOT necessarily necessitate 'a separation'.
But what does NECESSITATE 'a separation' IS 'a concept', or 'view'.
So, 'separation' and/or 'parts' exist in 'thought' ONLY, and ALONE.
There is only One 'Thing', ALONE, which is 'separated' through thought and names/labels ALONE.
But this form of conceptual 'separation' was a necessary proponent for 'you', human beings, to make 'sense' of 'the world', in order so that thee One and ONLY 'I' could come to KNOW thy Self.
'I' needed a species, with the ability to gather, store, and recall 'information/knowledge' to evolve into 'being' so that 'I' could come to KNOW, EXACTLY, 'Who (and what) 'I' am', and this is where 'you', human beings, come into the Picture. 'you' are the only KNOWN species with the ability to learn, understand, and reason absolutely ANY and EVERY thing, and with the ability to store and recall all of that knowledge and information.
I am NOT doing what 'you' CLAIM here. Thus, the rest is moot.A 'part' is a conception/perception ONLY. So, the 'distinction' exists in 'thought' ALONE.
The word 'distinction' OBVIOUSLY implies or infers 'a separation'. So, it is 'thought', itself, which necessitates 'separates'. But this just then goes back to HOW the Mind and the brain work, EXACTLY.
2. If conception/view is not separate from reality then contradiction also ensues in the respect that some conceptions/views result in monism and others dualism. If conception/view is real then reality is contradictory.
3. Thoughts are real as evidenced by the fact we can perceive them.
4. How the mind and brain work are determined by the reality which forms them. If everything is matter and this matter results in contradictory thoughts, then matter is contradictory.
Re: The Unity Paradox
Posted: Wed Oct 05, 2022 7:33 am
This response explains WHY you are so LOST and CONFUSED here.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 04, 2022 8:26 pm1. Reality is.Age wrote: ↑Fri Sep 30, 2022 12:15 amWhat IS 'reality', to you, EXACTLY?
I am NOT doing what 'you' CLAIM here. Thus, the rest is moot.A 'part' is a conception/perception ONLY. So, the 'distinction' exists in 'thought' ALONE.
The word 'distinction' OBVIOUSLY implies or infers 'a separation'. So, it is 'thought', itself, which necessitates 'separates'. But this just then goes back to HOW the Mind and the brain work, EXACTLY.
But you can NOT inform 'us' of what 'reality' really is, so what you wrote her is all moot.
Who or what is the 'we' that can perceive thoughts? And, how exactly do 'we' perceive thoughts?
Also, 'we' can perceive of pink elephants that can fly by flapping their ears, so these are real, as evidenced by the fact we can perceive them, and by your very own "logic" here, right?
To you is there ANY thing that how it works is NOT determined by the so-called 'reality' which formed it?
ALSO, HOW the Mind and the brain ACTUALLY WORK is VERY DIFFERENT to what you just said and claimed here.
Matter IS matter, and what the word 'contradictory' refers to IS NOT matter. Therefore matter is NOT contradictory.
Or, if we wanted to follow 'your' so-called "logic" here "eodnhoj7", we could also say and claim:
If everything is matter and this matter results in NON contradictory thoughts,then matter is NOT contradictory. But, as can be CLEARLY SEEN here, to follow this kind of "logic" would be ABSOLUTELY ABSURD and RIDICULOUS.
Re: The Unity Paradox
Posted: Wed Oct 05, 2022 7:40 pm
2- Parts dont necessitate a separation, because the separation itself are the parts....
There are only "parts", and that "parts" is what we call "separation".
1- Unity, as "the connection of parts", is nonsense. There are only "parts", the "connection" is not a "thing", because if it is another "thing" then it is another "part". The "unity" or "connection" is a description we make about parts.
Simplify the universe to a inline 3 color pixeles (Blue-Green-Red).
Blue, Green and Red are the "parts", the "things", the "objects", the "forms", the "matter".
What is "Unity" in that universe? There is no such a thing, there are just the only Blue, Green and Red pixels.
There is no contradiction, just only when you talk about "Unity".
We say something is "connected" with something else, when we compare Blue and Green vs Blue and Red.
Blue is "touching" Green, but Blue is NOT touching directly to Red. So, we can say that Blue is connected to Green but not to Red.
But that is all abstract, descriptions, comparing.
Re: The Unity Paradox
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2022 10:11 pm
1. The separation of parts necessitates all parts as connected through the quality of separation.CHNOPS wrote: ↑Wed Oct 05, 2022 7:40 pm
2- Parts dont necessitate a separation, because the separation itself are the parts....
There are only "parts", and that "parts" is what we call "separation".
1- Unity, as "the connection of parts", is nonsense. There are only "parts", the "connection" is not a "thing", because if it is another "thing" then it is another "part". The "unity" or "connection" is a description we make about parts.
Simplify the universe to a inline 3 color pixeles (Blue-Green-Red).
Blue, Green and Red are the "parts", the "things", the "objects", the "forms", the "matter".
What is "Unity" in that universe? There is no such a thing, there are just the only Blue, Green and Red pixels.
There is no contradiction, just only when you talk about "Unity".
We say something is "connected" with something else, when we compare Blue and Green vs Blue and Red.
Blue is "touching" Green, but Blue is NOT touching directly to Red. So, we can say that Blue is connected to Green but not to Red.
But that is all abstract, descriptions, comparing.
2. If connection is not a thing then a falsity occurs as saying "connection" is to make a distinction, this distinction is a thing.
Re: The Unity Paradox
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2022 10:15 pm
1. So "reality is" is false? Reality is not?Age wrote: ↑Wed Oct 05, 2022 7:33 amThis response explains WHY you are so LOST and CONFUSED here.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 04, 2022 8:26 pm1. Reality is.Age wrote: ↑Fri Sep 30, 2022 12:15 am
What IS 'reality', to you, EXACTLY?
I am NOT doing what 'you' CLAIM here. Thus, the rest is moot.
A 'part' is a conception/perception ONLY. So, the 'distinction' exists in 'thought' ALONE.
The word 'distinction' OBVIOUSLY implies or infers 'a separation'. So, it is 'thought', itself, which necessitates 'separates'. But this just then goes back to HOW the Mind and the brain work, EXACTLY.
But you can NOT inform 'us' of what 'reality' really is, so what you wrote her is all moot.Who or what is the 'we' that can perceive thoughts? And, how exactly do 'we' perceive thoughts?
Also, 'we' can perceive of pink elephants that can fly by flapping their ears, so these are real, as evidenced by the fact we can perceive them, and by your very own "logic" here, right?To you is there ANY thing that how it works is NOT determined by the so-called 'reality' which formed it?
ALSO, HOW the Mind and the brain ACTUALLY WORK is VERY DIFFERENT to what you just said and claimed here.
Matter IS matter, and what the word 'contradictory' refers to IS NOT matter. Therefore matter is NOT contradictory.
Or, if we wanted to follow 'your' so-called "logic" here "eodnhoj7", we could also say and claim:
If everything is matter and this matter results in NON contradictory thoughts,then matter is NOT contradictory. But, as can be CLEARLY SEEN here, to follow this kind of "logic" would be ABSOLUTELY ABSURD and RIDICULOUS.
2. Reality is everything.
3. We perceive thoughts by making the distinction of thought.
4. How a thing works is reality thus inseparable from reality.
5. Your statement of matter resulting in non-contradictory thoughts and my statement that matter results in contradictory thoughts are both contradictory and the result of matter.
Re: The Unity Paradox
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2022 11:40 pm
Is there some sort of message that you are trying to convey here?Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 06, 2022 10:15 pm1. So "reality is" is false? Reality is not?Age wrote: ↑Wed Oct 05, 2022 7:33 amThis response explains WHY you are so LOST and CONFUSED here.
But you can NOT inform 'us' of what 'reality' really is, so what you wrote her is all moot.Who or what is the 'we' that can perceive thoughts? And, how exactly do 'we' perceive thoughts?
Also, 'we' can perceive of pink elephants that can fly by flapping their ears, so these are real, as evidenced by the fact we can perceive them, and by your very own "logic" here, right?To you is there ANY thing that how it works is NOT determined by the so-called 'reality' which formed it?
ALSO, HOW the Mind and the brain ACTUALLY WORK is VERY DIFFERENT to what you just said and claimed here.
Matter IS matter, and what the word 'contradictory' refers to IS NOT matter. Therefore matter is NOT contradictory.
Or, if we wanted to follow 'your' so-called "logic" here "eodnhoj7", we could also say and claim:
If everything is matter and this matter results in NON contradictory thoughts,then matter is NOT contradictory. But, as can be CLEARLY SEEN here, to follow this kind of "logic" would be ABSOLUTELY ABSURD and RIDICULOUS.
2. Reality is everything.
3. We perceive thoughts by making the distinction of thought.
4. How a thing works is reality thus inseparable from reality.
5. Your statement of matter resulting in non-contradictory thoughts and my statement that matter results in contradictory thoughts are both contradictory and the result of matter.
If yes, then will you explain what it is EXACTLY?
Re: The Unity Paradox
Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2022 2:05 am
1- You are creating an abstract though when you say "connected through the quality of separation". What does really mean?1. The separation of parts necessitates all parts as connected through the quality of separation.
2. If connection is not a thing then a falsity occurs as saying "connection" is to make a distinction, this distinction is a thing.
Is like saying "The 3 pixels are connected through the concept of being a pixel" ¿?
That is an abstraction in your mind. What is what really really exists? just the 3 pixels.... there is no "connection" neither "unity".
2- "connection" is an abstraction. Remember, there are just 3 pixels. Where is that "connection"? is not another pixel so what is?
Answer this question please:
Do you believe in Platonic idealism? do you believe that the "ideas" exists? do you believe the "four" exists?
When I see four apples, I see four apples, I dont see a "four" beyond that apples. And I dont believe this "four" exists in any case.
Do you?
Re: The Unity Paradox
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2022 10:07 pm
1. The fact that an abstraction can be "created" necessitates it as real as only that which can be created is real.CHNOPS wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 2:05 am1- You are creating an abstract though when you say "connected through the quality of separation". What does really mean?1. The separation of parts necessitates all parts as connected through the quality of separation.
2. If connection is not a thing then a falsity occurs as saying "connection" is to make a distinction, this distinction is a thing.
Is like saying "The 3 pixels are connected through the concept of being a pixel" ¿?
That is an abstraction in your mind. What is what really really exists? just the 3 pixels.... there is no "connection" neither "unity".
2- "connection" is an abstraction. Remember, there are just 3 pixels. Where is that "connection"? is not another pixel so what is?
Answer this question please:
Do you believe in Platonic idealism? do you believe that the "ideas" exists? do you believe the "four" exists?
When I see four apples, I see four apples, I dont see a "four" beyond that apples. And I dont believe this "four" exists in any case.
Do you?
2. All numbers are connected to forms and this universal form is the loop. All things are loops given not only does tracing there form out result in a loop but the ability of generalizing things through numbers necessitates repetition of said things. The fact that you can connect "4" to "apples" necessitates "4" is a loop.