Conditionality as Absolute

[Eodnhoj7]

"There is only conditional truth or fact" is an absolute truth as conditionality contains only itself, ie other conditions, therefore referencing nothing. Conditionality is a thing in itself.

[CHNOPS]

You must to understand that "knowing" is an experience, a perception.

So, talking about "knowledge" is talking about a type o perception. Nothing special with that, is just another type of forms that we percieve.

Simbols, imagination of the past or the future.

But is the same that experiencie emotions, for example.

Then, the act of "knowing" is relative, of course, like others experience like swimming or playing ping pong.

If you say that "2 + 2 = 4", you are saying that every time we imagine 2 things, and then 2 more things, we will imagine 4 things.


What it mean that a knowledge is "absolute"? Is what we say abouth how it was or will be the experience of others SUBJECTS.

But, what others? humans? animales? molecules? atoms?

And if you understand that everything is a SUBJECT, then, with "absolute" you are saying that all parts of the universe will experience or interact the same thing.

But that is wrong. Because, for example, how can we say that "2 + 2 = 5" is a experience that happened in the origin of the universe?

When there were only 3 things in the universe, that knowledge of "2 + 2 = 5" is false. What is "5" when there are only 3 things in the universe?


The matematics were transforming over the time (despreciable time, yes, but time anyway). In the first second of the universe, there was a lot more than 3 things....


So, every knowledge is relative, and saying it is a relative experience that a subject have.


This relative doesnt mean "caos". Because is a relative with orden...


The theory of relative show us how the relatives subject evolves, and how we can proyect from one subject to other.


When you know a subject, then, you can know how is its experience.


Therefore, is not about saying that "all is relative" and then if I see red but you see green then we are all correct, because "relative to a define subject like what we considere normal human, then we can know what color is the right".

But relative to a insect, maybe there are no such a thing like "red" or "green".

[Eodnhoj7]

You must to understand that "knowing" is an experience, a perception.

So, talking about "knowledge" is talking about a type o perception. Nothing special with that, is just another type of forms that we percieve.

Simbols, imagination of the past or the future.

But is the same that experiencie emotions, for example.

Then, the act of "knowing" is relative, of course, like others experience like swimming or playing ping pong.

If you say that "2 + 2 = 4", you are saying that every time we imagine 2 things, and then 2 more things, we will imagine 4 things.


What it mean that a knowledge is "absolute"? Is what we say abouth how it was or will be the experience of others SUBJECTS.

But, what others? humans? animales? molecules? atoms?

And if you understand that everything is a SUBJECT, then, with "absolute" you are saying that all parts of the universe will experience or interact the same thing.

But that is wrong. Because, for example, how can we say that "2 + 2 = 5" is a experience that happened in the origin of the universe?

When there were only 3 things in the universe, that knowledge of "2 + 2 = 5" is false. What is "5" when there are only 3 things in the universe?


The matematics were transforming over the time (despreciable time, yes, but time anyway). In the first second of the universe, there was a lot more than 3 things....


So, every knowledge is relative, and saying it is a relative experience that a subject have.


This relative doesnt mean "caos". Because is a relative with orden...


The theory of relative show us how the relatives subject evolves, and how we can proyect from one subject to other.


When you know a subject, then, you can know how is its experience.


Therefore, is not about saying that "all is relative" and then if I see red but you see green then we are all correct, because "relative to a define subject like what we considere normal human, then we can know what color is the right".

But relative to a insect, maybe there are no such a thing like "red" or "green".

Perception is absolute as perception occurs through perception and is conditioned on nothing but itself, perception is universal, even the reaction of atoms to other atoms is the atom as perceiving other atoms because of its reaction.

[CHNOPS]

You must to understand that "knowing" is an experience, a perception.

So, talking about "knowledge" is talking about a type o perception. Nothing special with that, is just another type of forms that we percieve.

Simbols, imagination of the past or the future.

But is the same that experiencie emotions, for example.

Then, the act of "knowing" is relative, of course, like others experience like swimming or playing ping pong.

If you say that "2 + 2 = 4", you are saying that every time we imagine 2 things, and then 2 more things, we will imagine 4 things.


What it mean that a knowledge is "absolute"? Is what we say abouth how it was or will be the experience of others SUBJECTS.

But, what others? humans? animales? molecules? atoms?

And if you understand that everything is a SUBJECT, then, with "absolute" you are saying that all parts of the universe will experience or interact the same thing.

But that is wrong. Because, for example, how can we say that "2 + 2 = 5" is a experience that happened in the origin of the universe?

When there were only 3 things in the universe, that knowledge of "2 + 2 = 5" is false. What is "5" when there are only 3 things in the universe?


The matematics were transforming over the time (despreciable time, yes, but time anyway). In the first second of the universe, there was a lot more than 3 things....


So, every knowledge is relative, and saying it is a relative experience that a subject have.


This relative doesnt mean "caos". Because is a relative with orden...


The theory of relative show us how the relatives subject evolves, and how we can proyect from one subject to other.


When you know a subject, then, you can know how is its experience.


Therefore, is not about saying that "all is relative" and then if I see red but you see green then we are all correct, because "relative to a define subject like what we considere normal human, then we can know what color is the right".

But relative to a insect, maybe there are no such a thing like "red" or "green".

Perception is absolute as perception occurs through perception and is conditioned on nothing but itself, perception is universal, even the reaction of atoms to other atoms is the atom as perceiving other atoms because of its reaction.

Yes.