Philosophy Now Forum

Telling a lie is a fault what is more bad is telling a bad lie which is most serious. It makes it impossible knowing and not knowing the face of a friend and of an enemy. For we cannot judge what is allegorical and what is literal; and anything receive into mind become indelible and unalterable; and therefore it is most important thinking.

Zeno’s dialectic is unrufuted to the present day, even now not one has gone beyond his theories and the matter is left uncertain. Hypothesis are not under any law or causes, for instance, I assert something that is null then I show this null. But another consciousness does not assert this. This is metaphysics and very confusing. To declare one thing to be true, another has the right to assert something else to be true.

In Plato’s Parmenides (pp 127,128) Socrates says, Zeno deluded us into believing that he was telling something new. Kant, stated, we know appearances only. Space and time are two absolute opposites but they are one moment and it was Zeno who first showed their contradiction.

Pure reflection into self is the in-determinate ego. The ego is reflection-into-self, has an unlimited likeness of sunlight. The ego as an empty uncertainty of self, is merely an attitude, and characteristic of self.

The ego the most difficult to understand, because inner self not real, concealed, showing only connected bonds of necessity, is independent in face of other is pure reflection with self. Consider sunlight points out the manner in which reveals the ego as this unrest whirlpool of self-relating motion, it is pure return to self, a force, velocity everywhere present as absolute transparent.

The Hindus they believe the ego is like light and if it maintained ego in pure sameness would pass away into absolute transparency.

Gravity has the power that brings the pendulum, its oscillation, to rest in the direction of falling. Resistance is the cause of the pendulum oscillation is a thrusting motion. Gravity prevails over any foreign element. The body is thrusted is seen as a simple falling.


Gravity holds together two oppositions, i.e. two reciprocally regulated determination in one, passing from one state to another and only through this affirms being. Gravity units rest and motion, or more so gravity is capable of both resistance and attraction, gravity passes from one to the other, meaning, gravity does not automatically pass over into or does not automatically pass over into other, it is only transported by the single motion of two determinations connected constituting one motion.

Matter and motion equally two bodies is set in motion from the standpoint of matter is thrusting the struggle for one and the same dwelling or now and here thrusting to retain its now and here constitutes a determinateness of two bodies in a single point, touching one another but equally retaining their being. Thrusting is similar to time and times unity of past present and future; yet at the same time not.


Gravity holds together two opposition, i.e. two reciprocally regulated determination passes from one state to the other units rest and motion, or more so capable of both rest and motion but does not automatically pass over into the other it is only transported by the motion of two these determinations constituting one motion.

A cannon ball would fly off in a tangent without gravity. Bodies fall simply on account of their weight and a large body and a smaller body are equally weight. For example feathers do not fall like a lead bullet, but this is because of the resistance encountered. A rock falls faster in air than in water. If a body falls more than 15 feet in the first second, in two seconds, the body falls 135 feet or 9x15. What we have here is uniform motion, that is to say motion increases in time conforms to a law of motion.

Bill budhism is about self and inactive..it holds no activity it accepts evil as somehow a curse we must suffer and accept..buddhism for this reason lacks for me..its an anally retentive and insular practice which works for you alone but no one else..it can hardly be hailed as wisdom as it has none to give



Declaration isn`t fact..Barbara please quote Zeno before assuming I should know what you are talking about here???

Zeno's argument is that a line cannot be composed of points. If we suppose that a line segment is composed of a multiplicity of points, then we can always divide a line segment, and every bi -section leaves us with a line segment that can it be divided? Continuing with the bisection process, we never come to a point, a stopping place.

So, the many, the line, must be both limited and unlimited in number of points. It must be limited because it is just as many (points) as it is, no more, and less. It is therefore, a definite number, and a definite number is a finite or limited number. Although, the many must also be unlimited in number, for it is infinitely divisible.

What is motion Zeno argues, that if a thing moves from one point to another, it must first traverse half the distance It therefore must pass through an infinite number of points, and that is impossible.

He uses for an example the race with the tortoise that has a head start, and the swifter-running Achilles who can never overtake the tortoise. Before he comes up to the point at which the tortoise started, the tortoise will have got a little way, and so on ad infinitum. The notion of the flying object at rest Zeno argues, at any given moment it is in a space equal to its own length, and therefore is at rest at that moment.

Knowledge which took place centuries ago. A revival as such is recommended. One question was whether space is a mere property of time and when empty remains like a box, but space is free, not merely an arrangement of time and when time passes space remains..Space is freely spreading offers no resistance whatsoever, it contains nothing in itself. it is unbounded, extends in every direction.To measure space is only expressed in terms of point, particular lines, and plane, these points, lines, and planes constitute relation to a specific time elapsed, space into time and space. What offers resistance is matter, quantum or mass and motion. since there is motion something moves and that something is matter. That is how we conceive matter; when there is motion something moves, this something is subject to time..

The unfolding of things is what makes time .If everything stood still including our imaginations would endure but all things are temporal and are subject to change. Time passes away and does not rest. it is moton the collapse of space's immediate sameness. Time is eternal, it will not come to be, nor was it, but it is.

Very difficult to demonstrate space in reference to visible things point, line and plane are its only fixed opposition A line follows as an effect and passes over into the plane, or the plane. These are the onlyb measuring of space universal oneness without any intermediary existence, and offers no resistence whatsoever. Space is not being beingness and being not beingness it is infinite composed of ultimate indivisible units, or it must be divisible without end. Composed of indivisible units, these must have quality of something, and we are faced with the contradiction of a magnitude which cannot be divided. If it is divisible ad infinitum..As an out and out abstract being similar to time, as soon as I pronounce it dissolves, flows away and passes over into another moment.Thee of time's only absolute is now ; a timeless abstract universalitiy, such as space, time itself, the sun, the Elements.Time only points to another place, so, one place points to another place yet place remains the same, just differences of the same moments. space into time and time into space a self-regeneration , in which one occupies a place, then moves to another place yet both this before and after occupy the same place.

The art of rhetoric is the art of speech. Socrates believed the art of rhetoric there seem to be a great many holes ophocles or Euripides knew how to make a very long speech about a small matter, and a short speech about a great matter, and also a sorrowful speech, or a terrible, or threatening speech, or any other kind of speech, and in teaching this fancies that he is teaching the art of tragedy.

Tisias and Gorgias, who were not ignorant that probability is superior to truth, and who by: force of argument make the little appear great and the great little, disguise the new in old fashions and the old in new fashions, and have discovered forms for everything, either short or going on to infinity. composers of speeches- writers of poems, whether set to music or not; and to Solon and others who have composed writings in the form of political discourses which they would term laws-to all of them we are to say that if their compositions are based on knowledge of the truth, and they can defend or prove them, when they are put to the test, by spoken arguments, which leave the writings poor in comparison of them, then they are to be called, not only art of rhetoric but are worthy of a higher name, befitting the serious pursuit of life.

NO. You only care about the stuff you loose that you cling to. Even the Buddha can loose stuff.
But it is the loosing that makes the having worthwhile.
If I did not care about loosing my life-partner, then that is the same as saying I don't care for her. I'd rather care for her in the knowledge that I might loose her, rather than not have her at all.

I can say the same about other things in my life.

.



I think Buddha may have meant something different than what you attribute to the quote to mean.



As philosophers, one of the things we must do is search for the truth. In order to search for the truth you must respect the truth. To search for truth you must begin with the truth. And even then, with all our efforts, the truth is difficult to become.
~~~ Bill Wiltrack ~~~





.

Sounds pretty but if you begin with the truth what point searching?

.


I'm referring to two different types of the recognition of truth.



.

And these would be?

.



I understand truth to be of two kinds. Two kinds that intermingle yet can be distinguished in their extremes.

For me that would be initially a relative, or small truth, if you will, and the second type of truth would be a Truth found in our observation, or ultimate Truth.

The first truth is truth in small things. For instance, honesty in our representations. Truthfulness.


The second type of truth that we could distinguish could sometimes be considered the ultimate Truth that can be observed by a human being or Truth with a capital T.



The first would deal with science or the accepted norm.

The second type of Truth has more to do with consciousness and states of consciousness.

Both overlap and there is ALL the hues of grey in-between.




In philosophy, if we choose to search for ultimate Truth, we must begin with small or relative truth. We must search to be truthful we must practice and respect honesty.

If we make super-human efforts and are extremely lucky we may perhaps reach something that we can be satisfied to call ultimate Truth.


You may have eyes but cannot see. We may have ears but cannot hear.




.

In Hegel’s Philosophy of Nature chapter two, Physics, his first chapter is Mechanics about space and time matter and motion, and universal gravitation as having purely spatial determinations in the solar system.

He starts with Sun as self-liberation, an extracting being against gravity, and determinate within self. Then sun is developed being in opposition to downward motion the might of gravity.

Sunlight is most difficult to explain because light is an immaterial only shows connected bond.

Hegel begins first shows display a group of bodies in relationship with each other in the solar system enters into the sphere of sun being-for self-independent in face of other determinations, as pure identity with self-reflection.

He then shows sunlight being the possibility of unifying with all things that enter in community with it. Light is this sharing of a common existence, bring interconnectedness; everything exists because of sunlight.



In sunlight begins is the manifestation of material being. Just as the ego reflection-into-self, and is a likeness of sunlight self-consciousness to itself, but the ego is empty uncertainty, merely an attitude reflecting itself.

The Hindus believe, the ego, if the ego maintained being in pure self-sameness would pass away into transparency like sunlight.

The archetypical crystal in which every eye rejoices, air, the first-born of light and darkness is the diamond of the earth. The crystal of the earth is air, which is subordinate to light, and free from earthy flaw, free unrestricted, otherwise the crystal is simply opaque.

This relationship belongs to colors hovers outside shapes shadowy existence a mere relation between light and darkness; this is in short a spectrum.

Hegel deals with transparency as crystal air, which lets other bodies, be seen through it, showing of one body in another. Crystal is the medium, an intermediary. He uses for example water in air has greater specific weight, as if air were contracted into a smaller space, this is so called refraction.

Those who shoot fish know that to aim below the spot where one sees the fish, because visibility of the fish is raised. Another example Hegel gives, if two glasses, one is empty of water and the other filled of water and both having a coin in it, the coin seen in the empty glass is the one density and the coin seen in the water glass is the diversion. This phenomenon is seen to be difficult to comprehend because here is sensibility, perceiving spirituality. In treating visibility we are in the field of ideality, for visibility is the affirming of something ideally present in another but only spatial determinateness. The phenomenon of refraction is to be understood more exactly, water enters into air but immaterially seen in air as if water was air.