↪TheGreatArcanum
Apparently, try as you might, you're not engaging with what I've actually written or my speculations (re: OP), so I'll leave it to you to sort out what you can or to not do so. — 180 Proof
There is no great mystery or secret about potentiality — Gregory
Buddha knew only being's opposite can be the source of being. — Gregory
there is no opposite to being, in the present. the past and future are identical to non-being, that is to say, they do not exist, just the same as non-being. — TheGreatArcanum
Wouldn't the past then be the opposite of being? Which way does it go? Aren't we talking about source within a cyclic system? You don't know the first thing about philosophy. You're probably a Thomist or Aristotelian — Gregory
The past existed, the present exists, and the future will exist. The ground of being which contains and precedes all contingent beings (i.e. beings having a finite duration), persists in existing, and in doing so, makes time conceivable, through memory, awareness, understanding, and willing, of course. Time is not cyclic in this sense, but it is cyclic in another sense, that is, in terms of the relationship between the perceived object and the perceiving subject, in which case, there is necessarily a time dialation between them because the object as perceived is the object, as it was, and not as it is, meaning, that all objects of perception are of the past, in relation to awareness which exists in the absolute present, and both perception and causation flows from the present to the past, that is, from the Primary Present to the Secondary Present moment in time, and from the Absolute to the Relative. — TheGreatArcanum
This is just Einstein's philosophy. — Gregory
This is just Einstein's philosophy. The source of the universe is and must be incomprehensible. — Gregory
Only nothingness therefore qualifies. — Gregory
There is no unfathomable being or substance out there. — Gregory
All can be known. — Gregory
hese are the basics of philosophy — TheGreatArcanum
ironically, to say that the source of the universe is in incomprehensible is to make an epistemological claim about the source of the universe. — TheGreatArcanum
↪A Seagull Thanks. And I agree with your analysis of how logic works. I would call the two types you described as analytical logic and applied logic. But only becasue I am old skool. I like descriptive names that mean what they say. User-friendly naming conventions — god must be atheist
Of course, all philosophical systems have first principles, but the difference between one system of philosophy and another is that they have differing first principles. What I am asking is, however, is if it is the case that all first principles are presuppositional in the sense that they may or may not be true at this present moment in time, or may or may not be true in some future or past moment of time, or may or may not be true from one perspective and not another; or, if there are eternally true propositions (i.e. eternal truths) that are not presuppositional, but absolutely necessary (i.e. First Principles?) If not, why not? And if so, why, and what are they? — TheGreatArcanum
It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence. — William Kingdon Clifford
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy — Hamlet
As far as I have read, in metaphysics one should not speak of first principles, but rather of first objects. That is, the world, the soul and God. — Borraz
Well, "world" (object), "the soul" (fiction) and "God" (fiction) can be abductively inferred by differentiating objects from fictions.As far as I have read, in metaphysics one should not speak of first principles, but rather of first objects. That is, the world, the soul and God. — Borraz
"The a priori unchanging structures of the eternal aspect of existence"... The heaviest syntagm I've ever read. — Borraz
Well, "world" (object), "the soul" (fiction) and "God" (fiction) abductively inferred from differentiating objects from fictions. — 180 Proof
Contemplate the shitpiles :eyes: — 180 Proof
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.