From: Mr. Spears (dspears@toucansurf.net)
Date: Sat Oct 15 2005 - 17:39:54 BST
it doesnt matter what it mis for you.
On 13 Oct 2005, at 16:27, platootje@netscape.net wrote:
> Hello again Ham,
>
> Previously I stated:
>
>> Nothingness for me merely represents the
>> hypothetical opponent of Essence. I say hypothetical,
>> because it cannot exist as opponent.
>
> To which you replied:
>
> You see, I think the "opponent" IS existence, and to that extent,
> existence
> IS "hypothetical", as opposed to virtual or "real".
>
> Let me answer to that:
>
> Since Essence has no polarity, sinse it is undifferentiated, it can
> not have any opponent!
>
> You ask a silly question:
>
> I'll ask a silly question to illustrate a point. If you had the
> absolute
> potentiality of Essence, including a hole in your middle, wouldn't you
> want
> to exercise your potential and rid yourself of that hole?
>
> I'll give a silly answer:
>
> Well, anything that actual IS, is part of that absolute potentiality.
> Which means, it's polar, differentiated.
> Anything that isn't (potentialy) actual is either nothingness or
> Essence.
> Since Essence is undifferentiated nothingness cannot essentialy be.
> So there either actually is a hole, which makes it part of existence,
> which makes it unequal to nothingness, or there isn't a hole.
> Nothingness is the existantial opponent of existence. Outside of
> existence it looses its meaning.
> (That's my 2 cents anyway, feel free to disagree in 3.. 2... 1 seconds)
>
>
> On a serious note you say:
>
> Seriously, from my relational perspective, I see Essence as
> "negational". I
> think of Creation as a constant denial of nothingness. But this
> nothingness
> cannot "leave" Essence, because -- if this theory is correct --
> nothingness
> is a constituent of the "contrariety" of which Essence is the
> "coincidence",
> to use Cusa's terms.
>
> Me:
> So obviously to this I don't agree
>
> You:
> Instead, nothingness serves a metaphysical purpose
>
> Me:
> Indeed it does
>
> You:
> it divides finite awareness from the absolute whole, making it the
> subject of
> an objective otherness. And the result is existential reality
> differentiated by the nothing-self which is also a free agent capable
> of
> realizing the value of what it is not.
>
> Me:
> Again I don't agree, nothingness is not part of our
> differentiating/differentiated awareness.
>
> You:
> You have a problem with my negational theory of differentiation, and
> have
> theorized that value does the dividing. If that were the case, Value
> would
> be a universal, like Pirsig's fourth level. But think about what we
> value -- people, things, and ideas. These are all differentiated
> objects.
> They have to be recognized as discrete entities before they can be
> valued.
> We don't recognize a thing by valuing it. We must first "bring the
> thing or
> idea into being" by separating it from all otherness. Differentiation
> is a
> "quantitative" intellectual process, not a "valuistic" one. It
> involves
> specificity, form, numbers, parts, moments in time, measurements in
> space.
> Values, on the other hand, involve qualities, desires, emotions, and
> esthetic or moral comparisons.
>
> Me:
> This is an 'old' disagreement between us, when we 'value' a person as
> beautifull, by our judgement then:
> this person has already been valued as 'a person' by our intellect and:
> it has already been valued as shaped colours different from the
> surroundings by our eyes and:
> it has already been valued a photonic reaction by some molecules,
> etc.....
>
> I know you don't agree to this but one last try to convince you.
>
> Think deepest level... think quantum physics.... (just for this ones)
> All that exists is energy, with its different forms of manifestations
> Energy when un-manifested is spaceless and timeless
> And energy only manifests itself when experienced/valued
>
> No think self, think about what your world really is.
> A mental picture, your body and brains are an other to you. What is
> really your world consists of merely thoughts, provided and shaped by
> external stimuli.
>
> Well if this starting point is timeless, spaceless energy
> And if the ending point is timeless, spaceless thoughts
> Then why would there be the need for anything in between that is
> anything but that?
>
> Well enough from the cabinet of silly thoughts (hope you know Monthy
> Pyton)
>
> Kind regards,
> Reinier.
>
> __________________________________________________________________
> Look What The New Netscape.com Can Do!
> Now you can preview dozens of stories and have the ones you select
> delivered to you without ever leaving the Top Home Page. And the new
> Tool Box gives you one click access to local Movie times, Maps, White
> Pages and more. See for yourself at
> http://netcenter.netscape.com/netcenter/
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archives:
> Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> Nov '02 Onward -
> http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Oct 15 2005 - 20:31:15 BST