A Senseless Argument 3

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

A Senseless Argument 3

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

1. There is a totality of being.

2. This totality of being is one being as totality encompasses everything.

3. In encompassing everything a multiplicity of phenomenon are observed given everything assumes a state of related particles, ie "parts"; further given the whole is a set of relations and as a set of relations necessitates parts.

4. This totality of being is a relationship of parts; as a relationship of parts each part is an individual.

5. Each part as an individual is each part as a whole given one part is distinct to another part; this distinction necessitates wholeness.

6. The whole of being, as a totality, is thus a series of individual wholes.

7. This whole, ie totality, is composed of itself as the series of wholes mirrors the whole itself as a whole.

8. The one whole manifested through the many wholes necessitates the one as fragmented.

9. As fragmented the whole is no longer the whole yet necessitates many wholes.

10. This fragmentation of the whole necessitates the relationship between the many wholes as the many wholes share the distinct quality of wholeness thus mirroring the greater quality of the one whole.

11. However the one whole is fragmented thus the many wholes in mirroring the fragmented and paradoxical nature of the one whole are in themselves composed of many wholes.

12. The whole moves toward a state of fragmentation thus is no longer a whole yet the wholes from which it is derived are in fact wholes.

13. These multiple wholes are fragmented, as the one whole is fragmented, thus sharing the same nature between the whole and the wholes.

14. This underlying fragmentation of the wholes and the fragmentation of the whole and wholes necessitates a connection between the wholes and the whole and wholes; this connection is observed through the same nature of fragmentation which the whole and wholes share.

15. The whole/wholes as fragmented are thus connected; as connected they are fragmented.

16. Thus the whole exists but is dually not itself a whole.

17. A contradiction thus occurs in measurement as measurement is the manifestation of whole/wholes as the application of the term "totality"; what is total is a whole.

18. We measure reality through the dichotomy of the whole and the wholes, yet this dichotomy is dually not a dichotomy as a dichotomy necessitates a relationship therefore a singularity

17. In conceptualizing a totality a state of contradiction occurs as the total is not only composed of itself but is fragmented thus loses its nature of "self-ness"; the total is no longer the total as a state exists outside the total, yet this state which exists outside of the total is both a total and a part of a larger total thus necessitates a total.

18. Totality both exists and does not exist; this is a contradiction thus measurement is a contradiction as measurement is based around individuation under the term "wholeness".
Post Reply