Philosophy Now Forum

Considering contradiction requires oppositional contrast that allows a distinct identity of things is contradiction necessary in one respect for identity while in another respect self-negating considering contrast is a relationship thus connective?

The necessity of contradiction is inherent to the functioning of the human mind.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 2:36 am Considering contradiction requires oppositional contrast that allows a distinct identity of things is contradiction necessary in one respect for identity while in another respect self-negating considering contrast is a relationship thus connective?

Contradictions are just reified choices. With the arrow of time reversed.

Take the present in relation to the future.
X is what happens
not-X is everything that could've happened but didn't.

What we perceive as contradictions are really just the crystallization of possibility into actuality, viewed backwards through time.

The "law" of non-contradiction simply states that you can't manifest not-X without it becoming X.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Jan 07, 2025 9:57 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 2:36 am Considering contradiction requires oppositional contrast that allows a distinct identity of things is contradiction necessary in one respect for identity while in another respect self-negating considering contrast is a relationship thus connective?

Contradictions are just reified choices. With the arrow of time reversed.

Take the present in relation to the future.
X is what happens
not-X is everything that could've happened but didn't.

What we perceive as contradictions are really just the crystallization of possibility into actuality, viewed backwards through time.

The "law" of non-contradiction simply states that you can't manifest not-X without it becoming X.

Yes, your comment is a description viewed from a different angle, on the subject of 'Necessity of Contradiction'.

The internet/inner-net of information says: "It from bit" is a concept that symbolizes the idea that every item of the physical world has an immaterial source and explanation. The concept was introduced by John Archibald Wheeler, who believed that "every physical quantity, every it, derives its ultimate significance from bits, binary yes-or-no indications''. In other words, all things physical are information-theoretic in origin, and the universe is participatory.

The paradox is necessary whenever there is a demand for knowledge. Knowledge then, creates the idea there is a knower and something to be known, which instantaneously creates a duality, which implies a paradox insofar as the paradox is not actually there in nature or reality, as both the knower and the known, are one and the same nondual knowing.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Jan 07, 2025 9:57 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 2:36 am Considering contradiction requires oppositional contrast that allows a distinct identity of things is contradiction necessary in one respect for identity while in another respect self-negating considering contrast is a relationship thus connective?

Contradictions are just reified choices. With the arrow of time reversed.

Take the present in relation to the future.
X is what happens
not-X is everything that could've happened but didn't.

What we perceive as contradictions are really just the crystallization of possibility into actuality, viewed backwards through time.

The "law" of non-contradiction simply states that you can't manifest not-X without it becoming X.

And if choice is not completely determined, assuming free will, than the deterministic effects that follow a choice are an effect of the spontaneity of choice. Choice necessitates determinism as spontaneous.

Fairy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 07, 2025 8:33 am The necessity of contradiction is inherent to the functioning of the human mind.

Yes. And the contradiction occurs in deeper grades as it can be congruent or not.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 07, 2025 5:33 pm

Fairy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 07, 2025 8:33 am The necessity of contradiction is inherent to the functioning of the human mind.

Yes. And the contradiction occurs in deeper grades as it can be congruent or not.

Yes, I concur.

Consciousness and the contents of consciousness are identical. Even though appearing different, or separated.

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2025 12:42 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 07, 2025 5:33 pm

Fairy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 07, 2025 8:33 am The necessity of contradiction is inherent to the functioning of the human mind.

Yes. And the contradiction occurs in deeper grades as it can be congruent or not.

Yes, I concur.

Consciousness and the contents of consciousness are identical. Even though appearing different, or separated.

True. Whatever distinctions one makes, that change internal or external experience, effectively result as a transition of the perceived self in various degrees or rather layers. Consciousness, and reality as experience for that matter, occurs in layers from what I am currently observing. It is like an onion or russian nesting doll.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2025 12:59 am

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2025 12:42 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 07, 2025 5:33 pm

Yes. And the contradiction occurs in deeper grades as it can be congruent or not.

Yes, I concur.

Consciousness and the contents of consciousness are identical. Even though appearing different, or separated.

True. Whatever distinctions one makes, that change internal or external experience, effectively result as a transition of the perceived self in various degrees or rather layers. Consciousness, and reality as experience for that matter, occurs in layers from what I am currently observing. It is like an onion or russian nesting doll.

MONAD

Fairy wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2025 9:33 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2025 12:59 am

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2025 12:42 pm

Yes, I concur.

Consciousness and the contents of consciousness are identical. Even though appearing different, or separated.

True. Whatever distinctions one makes, that change internal or external experience, effectively result as a transition of the perceived self in various degrees or rather layers. Consciousness, and reality as experience for that matter, occurs in layers from what I am currently observing. It is like an onion or russian nesting doll.

MONAD

Equals paradox...as monism necessitates the illusion of duality as one with it thus true by nature of occurring as an expression of the one given under monism illusion and truth are one thus dualism is true.

Dualism requires a relationship of opposites thus results in monism by said relationship.

The relation of monism and dualism results in synthesis thus is triadic.

The nature of all three existing through eachother results in a Quadratic view where transition of each into eachother is completion through an inherent emptiness that results in each being potentials for the other.

No to pure monism. No to pure dualism. No to a pure triad. Reality is quadratic, and experience with it for that matter for experience is all one knows.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 10, 2025 9:18 am

Fairy wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2025 9:33 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2025 12:59 am

True. Whatever distinctions one makes, that change internal or external experience, effectively result as a transition of the perceived self in various degrees or rather layers. Consciousness, and reality as experience for that matter, occurs in layers from what I am currently observing. It is like an onion or russian nesting doll.

MONAD

Equals paradox...as monism necessitates the illusion of duality as one with it thus true by nature of occurring as an expression of the one given under monism illusion and truth are one thus dualism is true.

Dualism requires a relationship of opposites thus results in monism by said relationship.

The relation of monism and dualism results in synthesis thus is triadic.

The nature of all three existing through eachother results in a Quadratic view where transition of each into eachother is completion through an inherent emptiness that results in each being potentials for the other.

No to pure monism. No to pure dualism. No to a pure triad. Reality is quadratic, and experience with it for that matter for experience is all one knows.

I like the way you have worded and given an interpretation as to the meaning of the word Monad.. I do understand where you are going with that.

Is what you have described here, similar to the concept of Turia? Or, are you referring to something else, and not Turia?

Btw, Eod, I think you are an amazing thinker, I'm so pleased you come to this forum to discuss your ideas. Thanks.

Fairy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 10, 2025 12:46 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 10, 2025 9:18 am

Fairy wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2025 9:33 am


MONAD

Equals paradox...as monism necessitates the illusion of duality as one with it thus true by nature of occurring as an expression of the one given under monism illusion and truth are one thus dualism is true.

Dualism requires a relationship of opposites thus results in monism by said relationship.

The relation of monism and dualism results in synthesis thus is triadic.

The nature of all three existing through eachother results in a Quadratic view where transition of each into eachother is completion through an inherent emptiness that results in each being potentials for the other.

No to pure monism. No to pure dualism. No to a pure triad. Reality is quadratic, and experience with it for that matter for experience is all one knows.

I like the way you have worded and given an interpretation as to the meaning of the word Monad.. I do understand where you are going with that.

Is what you have described here, similar to the concept of Turia? Or, are you referring to something else, and not Turia?

Btw, Eod, I think you are an amazing thinker, I'm so pleased you come to this forum to discuss your ideas. Thanks.

Thanks for the compliment Fairy, I appreciate it. I don't get them often, generally I am use to conflict of some form and I believe it is due to the context of the times we live in. It is an age of contradiction, so be it.

I am not familiar with the concept of Turia, never heard of it until now...and I read quite a lot. You are going to have to explain it to me.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 10, 2025 6:54 pm

The nature of all three existing through eachother results in a Quadratic view

I am not familiar with the concept of Turia, never heard of it until now...and I read quite a lot. You are going to have to explain it to me.

I leave you with this link if you are interested. I was referring Turia concept to the forth state of consciousness. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turiya

You have spoken before about layers of consciousness. You have said The nature of all three existing through each other results in a Quadratic view.

So I'm just wondering if Turia is the same idea as what you are saying here. Let me know if it is off track, or on track, as I am curious, and thanks.

I agree also, that we live in the age of contradiction. To be a human consciousness is contradiction, because humans have language, which is the cause of division where there is none.

Sorry I've spelt it wrong. I mean Turiya.

Fairy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 11, 2025 12:17 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 10, 2025 6:54 pm

The nature of all three existing through eachother results in a Quadratic view

I am not familiar with the concept of Turia, never heard of it until now...and I read quite a lot. You are going to have to explain it to me.

I leave you with this link if you are interested. I was referring Turia concept to the forth state of consciousness. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turiya

You have spoken before about layers of consciousness. You have said The nature of all three existing through each other results in a Quadratic view.

So I'm just wondering if Turia is the same idea as what you are saying here. Let me know if it is off track, or on track, as I am curious, and thanks.

I agree also, that we live in the age of contradiction. To be a human consciousness is contradiction, because humans have language, which is the cause of division where there is none.

Sorry I've spelt it wrong. I mean Turiya.

Reading it reminded me of an "experience" I had while practicing more advanced yoga, advanced being the context of holding a pose for a relatively long time, I saw and felt "see throughness".

I do not identity myself as religious or spiritual in the conventional sense of the words, as I believe these words have been bastardtized but rather at this point view my discipline of philosophical inquiry as a 'cultivation of awareness' and less of a pursuit of knowledge as knowledge has benefits but also limits.

My approach is quite simple: I occur, these religions and philosophies occur, so what is the nature, if any, of the depths of these occurences?

Getting back on topic:

From a taoist perspective the mind merged with itself, within meditation, seems overlapped with this as well as some experiences of Christian and Sufi mystics.

Considering the fourth state is a voidness, not light, not dark, not Grey or any shade of color, and the voidness is the transparency through which things occur, what I read seems pretty close to what I am arguing and experienced. Again there is a language barrier on everyone's part, including my own.

Fairy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 11, 2025 12:17 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 10, 2025 6:54 pm

The nature of all three existing through eachother results in a Quadratic view

I am not familiar with the concept of Turia, never heard of it until now...and I read quite a lot. You are going to have to explain it to me.

I leave you with this link if you are interested. I was referring Turia concept to the forth state of consciousness. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turiya

You have spoken before about layers of consciousness. You have said The nature of all three existing through each other results in a Quadratic view.

So I'm just wondering if Turia is the same idea as what you are saying here. Let me know if it is off track, or on track, as I am curious, and thanks.

I agree also, that we live in the age of contradiction. To be a human consciousness is contradiction, because humans have language, which is the cause of division where there is none.

Sorry I've spelt it wrong. I mean Turiya.

And in regards to it being an age of contradiction, I am not a Hindu, but some of them argue we live in a fourth cycle known as The Evil Age...if memory serves.