wouldn't it be summa perplexitas?

finish high school

we is people who understand mathematics. Your analogy is completely wrong, you should have learnt it at high school, I see I waste my time here

any explanations? You are listening or reading the wrong people

that one person doesn't represent catholicism

i don't understand your point, ia it that nor numbers nor infinity exist? They point out to relations which do exist and are independent from physical reality. Infinity can very well be treated in math. Regarding what you say about position and the one of a kind I think you are mixing quantifiable and qualitative. Mathematics doesn't pretend nor avoid reality, it is reality, I hope you understand the difference between the signs we use and the entities, relations and structures it points out.

that's the accurate word, an aberration

got it. The question would then be, whether there is only potential infinity, like this of English which can never be actualized

I think evil involves a pathological condition

which would be the myth and why?

English is infinite? Math doesn't contain letters?
We use infinite in math. That for sure

that's the point and jung's is a model. Many misunderstood him as being mystical. There are different uses of the word spirit. Regarding instincts, more accurately would be them becoming habits, not being. They can also not become habits and take forms in the psychic accessible world through symbology and culture, as he extensively exemplified

new age and other movements and people take these kind of concepts as they want. Many saw the collective unconscious as a collective soul. It's just popular interpretation. Nowadays everyone talks about Schrödinger's cat having no clue about what it means and arriving to stupid conclusions.

unconscious has not led astray, you rather mean psychoanalysis as therapy. There i completely agree, there are better methods of habit correction without the long treatment of psychoanalysis. Regarding habits, that is not all it is. There are instincts and tendencies. I think Jung did well modelling the spirit with such concepts, sometimes misunderstood. Collective unconscious is not about species habits, but about instincts and the forms those intincts take.

yes I am aware of that. I wanted to point out that the process of awareness of the unconscious not only implies repressed aspects. That's the vision of Freud. Regarding evil, not only the shadow is responsible, as far as I understand, the others can also develp into negative complexes

may I dissent in one point? The collective unconscious is not about what is repressed, that's the personal one. The collective unconscious is a psychic layer of old ages whose content is common to all. Gaining awareness of collective unconscious is not about repressed aspects. I think that those archetypes like the shadow are pretty descriptive of frecuent forms of its various manifestations.

the self is the totality. What about the unconscious? I remember a quote from him: until you do not make the unconscious conscious, it will guide your life and you will call it fate

only an advice for everyone with respect to blm, just look who the sponsors are, who is putting the money there, the same with planned parenthood.

no problem, we both have greek names. Anyway, I don't wanna get into those long arguments either. Just answering your question, no a woman cannot do what she wants in that case, there is a responsibility already there, she can freely choose not to get pregnant. Life begins at conception, what kind of life is that, whatever its development, human. It's a human life. And as far as I know, constitution protects human life, that's the point with it. Crimes or life in danger are to be treated differently, as Apollodorus says. Then there's a lot more to say but this is getting in a different argument from the post.

["] Oh come on, those policies were fought by right wings and today are pretended to be the center. I said equality discourse which is different. Equality and liberty are misused words. Abortion is not about women's right, there is killing of an innocent humn being which the constitution protects, republicans renewed the fight against it. Please look the history of its promotion and planbed parenthood. This is but to talk long and I would not enter that now. Abot the taxes, same thing, you are right about not having time to discuss it, I think trumps policy was against tax raising. And yes, corporations is a kind of plutocracy and they are clearly with the democrats and their cancel culture. You mixed me and Apollodorus in that about ancient rome and Greece. That's talking about centuries with different governments and city states. Certainly not socialists.

about democrats the same can be said with elections. Regarding trump's policies it's pretty much the opposite as democrats agenda.

well let's try to name some policies: higher taxes, social plans, health care, abortion, gender ideology, equality discourse, et cetera

you are right. It is overwhelming and there is use and misuse. I guess the mass always wants panem et circenses

knowledge was never intended to be given to the masses, look nowadays what happens. Anyway, there is a good side of it.

about psychological differences, i guess the left today is like the teenager who wants to save the world but cannot take the garbage outside. What happens when the teenager rebels? they demand revolution, they just do not accept responsibility and say its actual state is somebody else's fault, feels like a victim. So for many the promises of the left are very appealing. They say don't worry it's not you, the problem is not that you won't be responsible and consequently grow up, it's the system and you are a victim. No wonder why the inexperienced youth is the most attracted.

That's right, Apollodorus. Greek philosophy was there in the middle ages, and here again is st. Thomas Aquinas an example of the 13th century. I think that there is a dark legend about middle ages as if there was nothing going on there and that's evidently false. Morover when we talk about Byzantium which was the center of cultural development in the upper middle ages.

I'd add that history of philosophy has long beeb regarded as to be rather a footnote to plato and Aristotle

i guess there are some answers that science can't give. For example in meta physics which is beyond physics. Through reason we recognize the existence of entities beyond our physical experience, as mathematics show. But there is the discussion if this actually exist, which divides mathemaricians between platonists an not platonists. I guess we are clearly limited and hoping to understand some big questions is rather courageous but given the fact that a question has an answer, and if we can see the question, why not hope to arrive at the answer. I see Aristotelian ontology as pretty strong on the one hand, and platonism also, considering structures and relations, mathematical, that go beyond our world and may not have a physical correspondence.

Christianism is heir, among other, of graeco latin high culture, plato and Aristotle. In my opinion in its summit with st thomas aquinas

conservative weak but nationalism strong... interesting

I think democrats agenda is pretty socialist

the problem is that it tends to totalitarian states inevitably. A tendency that starts in democracy with some regulations of state control, usually over the market but also over social politics. For the second it must be justified, but how, usually the techniques are the use of fear or victimization. The state of fear justifies the state taking over liberties on behalf of security. Victimization is when people are said to be victims of a system and they should allow the state to take care of it. So instead of working yoy receive plans, for example. It's a complex similar to the one commonly seen in teenagers who do not want to take responsibility. But it is responsibility what is going to make yourself grow up and be free. And marxism knows that and attack it. Coming back to the regulations of the market, in principle, introducing regulations leads to more regulations. I think that's the problem, the contron is not partial really or is not going to stay partial.

not quite, the logic is following the essence not the accident

The problem today is the new left. Marxist thinking is dominating social politics everywhere. They understood it a long time ago and played the battle on cultural grounds. Today they are winning and the right must wake up. The dialectics of bourgeois and proletarian has moved to identity politics and racism. The objective is always to attack individuality

my points were never debunked, just because you say it it isn't magically happening.

again, it's not your opinion about what you think it's human life, tgat has already been resolved in biology. Neither is my opinion. It's a fact. From there the rest follows. Regarding your example of an ape being more intelligent, an ape is an ape and it's not going to be more than that. Do not misinterpret me, I value apes, but as apes. And the foetus has a different essence. So it's irrelevant your comparison

you are wise stopping because i proved it legally and biologically

Democracy as understood today is flawed,
it permits that if the majority thinksthat 2 + 2 is 21 it can be voted and passed as a law and if you are against it you are against Democracy and you are going to be canceled. Yes the left knew that and they have the control now

he was right, not though in that what he proposed after, that a man create the values. Today we are living the era after that, in which the left is dominating politics in the west and promoting the death of man. Dostoevsky was right

a psychiatric condition is behind antinatalists, calling for destruction of human life and claiming that it has no value. Evidently an inner conflict can create such a profile. May you one day open your eyes and discover how unconscious forces are guiding yourself into the realm where there is no reason. Onthe other side there is a realm of reason. Biology and logic have proven my points. Do not mix the animals here because it was never a point of discussion here. Which I do respect under the same arguments, the value of them is not given by their capacity of feeling pain. In such a frame I am able to respect insects for example. The only animal that can give them value is the human being in its dimension of morality. Intellect puts the man in a higher hierarchy in the animal realm. Yes there is hierarchy and structures and responsibilities. People with trouble accepting that develop their complexes in ideologies and as Jung called them spirit epidemics. Anyway, again, this has nothing to do with the discussion but even there your reasoning is flawed. Evidently you just feel forced to get off the track under feeble arguments, in reality the lack of them. My advice, study, be humble and take responsibilities.