1. The infinite regress/progress is realistic as "Now" is continuous and without end or beginning.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Jun 03, 2022 6:25 amNope, I have summarized your above as a 'bottom-up' approach which invoke an infinite regress which is not realisticEodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 10:23 pmYou ignored:Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 4:58 am As I had argued your bottom-up approach to stop an infinite regress is unrealistic and merely based on a hasty desperate psychological impulse driven by an existential crisis.
What is most realistic is the top-down-approach-FSK which relies on empirical verification and justifications supported by rational philosophical reasonings [to prevent Scientism].
In this case, we should then depend as far and down based on available evidences and rational justification.
We may speculate beyond the empirical justification but it must remained empirically-based and supported by philosophical reasonings.
For example I can speculate there are human-like people existing in a planet 100 light years from Earth.
Such a speculation is empirically possible because all the critical variables referred are empirical. So it is just a matter of producing the direct empirical evidences for verification and justification.
In the case of a hasty jump to reify something to stop the infinite regress, e.g. a first cause, your speculation is this case is not empirically based.
I ask, why is that you cannot ignore the temptation of an infinite regress?
As I mentioned in the other post,
Why you hastily jumped to close an infinite regress and why are stuck in the 'kindergarten' level in terms of reality is due to a cognitive dissonance arising desperate inherent psychology impulses that hold you back from progress.
It is VERY 'painful' to leave an infinite regress unattended.
This is why when people [especially theists] who have discovered quickie theism as a consonance to soothe the very painful cognitive dissonance of infinite regress, will even kill those who threaten the security of the consonances they are clinging onto.
Suggest you reflect more deeply and strive to grow out of your "kindergarten classes" to the higher levels of knowledge.
1. The totality is absolute has there is not comparison; so say the whole is relative to its parts is to equate the whole to the parts and we are left with a singularity without comparison.
2. It is absolute that there are conditions as everything is reducible to a condition thus the condition is a thing in itself as it references further conditions.
4. The FSK referencing another FSK referencing another FSK makes "FSK" utterly incoherent.
It is only your 'bottom-up' that you stopped an infinite regress.As to the infinite regress you ignored this:
3. .... To stop this infinite regress there is a point in which the FSK must be resulting from nothing.
My 'top-down' approach do not entail any infinite regress at all.
It is only your 'bottom-up' that you engaged an infinite regress.And to continue:
1. Your FSKs are a result of an existential crisis.
2. The dependency of an FSK on another FSK so on an so forth necessitates the quality that is an FSK to be self-referential thus a thing in itself as the quality that is the FSK underlies all of being. Everything that is defined qualifies as an FSK thus the FSK, as said before, is self-referential and is a thing in itself.
3. "Philosophical reasonings" can equate to any form of interpretation as this is an open ended term; as such anything can be justified as anything can be defined. Due to this "infinite regress" is one logical outcome.
4. "Being" is a thing itself as it references only itself thus nothing; being is absolute.
My 'top-down' [empirical plus philosophical reasonings] approach do not entail any infinite regress at all.
2. Without infinite regress your FSK not only is founded in nothing but is circular in rationale.
3. "Bottom up" and "top down" are relative contexts of interpretation where there is no justification, without circularity or assumption, that one is better than the other.