Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 5039
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Wed Aug 07, 2019 1:24 am

Enough of you have read my arguments over the years.

For those who haven't here is a very brief synonypsis.

1. The Munchauseen trillema sets the foundations for philosophy.

2. All axioms are assumed; hence points of origin. All axioms are continuums; hence defined through a progressive linearism. All axiom are circular; hence maintained by circularity.

3. The Munchauseen trillema sets the foundation for platonic forms. While used by Buddhist philosopher's such as nagarjuna, it represents a tying point between eastern and western thought under the symbol of the monad.

The circle was thought divine by the pre and post socratics in the west. In the east, under buddhism, taoism, and Hinduism, it had similar connotations and represented enlightenment.

The point can be referenced as the emptiness of nirvana, or the "formless" that the gods (forms, with gods being reincarnated as forms in Tiberan buddhism) "drank from" in Socrates dialogues with phiadrus.


4. All phenomenon, existing through the trillema, necessitate universal platonic forms that underlie all phenomenon while necessitating a connection to eastern philosophy primarily through the universal symbol of the monad (which is further approximated in a dualistic version under the Yin yang of daoism).


So for discussion:

Does the trillema sets the foundation for philosophy?

Yes, no, maybe.

Age
Posts: 3579
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Age » Wed Aug 07, 2019 7:02 am

To me, no.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 5039
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:25 am

Age wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 7:02 am
To me, no.
Pure assumption relative to the point of view of the observer. Applies to first law of trillema.

Age
Posts: 3579
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Age » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:35 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:25 am
Age wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 7:02 am
To me, no.
Pure assumption relative to the point of view of the observer. Applies to first law of trillema.
Pure assumption you made here. Whereas I made absolutely no assumption here.

As I continually say, while you continue to make assumptions and have beliefs you will continue to be closed and not able to see thee actual and real Truth of things.

What do you propose is the first law of "trillema"?

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 5039
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:09 pm

Age wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:35 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:25 am
Age wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 7:02 am
To me, no.
Pure assumption relative to the point of view of the observer. Applies to first law of trillema.
Pure assumption you made here. Whereas I made absolutely no assumption here.

As I continually say, while you continue to make assumptions and have beliefs you will continue to be closed and not able to see thee actual and real Truth of things.

What do you propose is the first law of "trillema"?
Yes, mine is an assumption...but I follow my own premise. All axioms are assumed then all axioms progress, then they circle back.

Your proof is assumption as well considering the relativistic nature of your stance due to your point of observation. Even group agreement necessitates a relative point of awareness from a zeitgeist relative to another zietgeist.

You cann avoid assumptions without giving further definition of a phenomenon...which becomes an assumption in itself.

Age
Posts: 3579
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Age » Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:34 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:09 pm
Age wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:35 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:25 am


Pure assumption relative to the point of view of the observer. Applies to first law of trillema.
Pure assumption you made here. Whereas I made absolutely no assumption here.

As I continually say, while you continue to make assumptions and have beliefs you will continue to be closed and not able to see thee actual and real Truth of things.

What do you propose is the first law of "trillema"?
Yes, mine is an assumption...but I follow my own premise. All axioms are assumed then all axioms progress, then they circle back.

Your proof is assumption as well considering the relativistic nature of your stance due to your point of observation.
What do you mean "your proof"?

I have not even given any "proof", so I certainly have not given any assumption also.

You are assuming some thing completely wrong here, unless of course you can show otherwise. What is the actual assumption that you are assuming I am giving here?
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:09 pm
Even group agreement necessitates a relative point of awareness from a zeitgeist relative to another zietgeist.
Who cares?
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:09 pm
You cann avoid assumptions without giving further definition of a phenomenon...which becomes an assumption in itself.
This is just another one of YOUR assumptions, once again.

When you stop making assumptions, then we can move on.

Now, besides writing the word "no", showing that you are continually making more and more assumptions, and saying that while you continue to make assumptions you are not open, I have asked you a question for clarity about what do you propose is the first law of "trillema". Now, would you care to clarify this?

Are you saying that 'assuming'is the first law of the trillema?

What is it that you actually want to discuss here? You did, after all, say; "So for discussion", then asked a question and gave three options to answer.

I did my part, so let us now discuss.

To discuss I found if you clarify the things you say, then I gain a better understanding of what is that you want to say, and discuss.

Until I fully know what you are talking about when you say things like; "first law of trillema", etc, then we really have nothing to discuss.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 5039
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:44 pm

Age wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:34 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:09 pm
Age wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:35 am


Pure assumption you made here. Whereas I made absolutely no assumption here.

As I continually say, while you continue to make assumptions and have beliefs you will continue to be closed and not able to see thee actual and real Truth of things.

What do you propose is the first law of "trillema"?
Yes, mine is an assumption...but I follow my own premise. All axioms are assumed then all axioms progress, then they circle back.

Your proof is assumption as well considering the relativistic nature of your stance due to your point of observation.
What do you mean "your proof"?

I have not even given any "proof", so I certainly have not given any assumption also.

Proof is merely a state of definition. You proved your stance as strictly subjective. You assumed a negative stance.

You are assuming some thing completely wrong here, unless of course you can show otherwise. What is the actual assumption that you are assuming I am giving here?

That there are no assumptions.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:09 pm
Even group agreement necessitates a relative point of awareness from a zeitgeist relative to another zietgeist.
Who cares?
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:09 pm
You cann avoid assumptions without giving further definition of a phenomenon...which becomes an assumption in itself.
This is just another one of YOUR assumptions, once again.

Yes and no. Yes from the angle I am presenting it, no because all truths are relegated to assumed axioms.

When you stop making assumptions, then we can move on.

False, I state all axioms are assumed. If I did not present my argument as also assumed I would contradict my own premises.

Now, besides writing the word "no", showing that you are continually making more and more assumptions, and saying that while you continue to make assumptions you are not open, I have asked you a question for clarity about what do you propose is the first law of "trillema". Now, would you care to clarify this?

Are you saying that 'assuming'is the first law of the trillema?

All axioms are assumed is the often presented first law of the trillema. But because this must be further explained given a continuum of definition, the second law applies simultaneously. All axioms are assumed because all assumptions are axiomatic necessitates the third law of the trillema existing simultaneously.

The three laws exist simultaneously through eachother, hence any 1st, 2nd, 3rd is relative to the beginning starting point.


What is it that you actually want to discuss here? You did, after all, say; "So for discussion", then asked a question and gave three options to answer.

I did my part, so let us now discuss.

To discuss I found if you clarify the things you say, then I gain a better understanding of what is that you want to say, and discuss.

Until I fully know what you are talking about when you say things like; "first law of trillema", etc, then we really have nothing to discuss.


Point number 2 describes the three laws...guess which is first.

Skepdick
Posts: 1846
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Skepdick » Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:54 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:09 pm
You cann avoid assumptions without giving further definition of a phenomenon...which becomes an assumption in itself.
Then don't define the phenomenon. Just observe and experience it. A priori language.

If you are focusing your attention on axioms and definitions, then you have already discarded the school of phenomenology.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 5039
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:38 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:54 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:09 pm
You cann avoid assumptions without giving further definition of a phenomenon...which becomes an assumption in itself.
Then don't define the phenomenon. Just observe and experience it. A priori language.

False, a priori is a description that loops itself considering it must be assumed.
Still trillemma.


If you are focusing your attention on axioms and definitions, then you have already discarded the school of phenomenology.

false, because phenomenology observes phenomenon and must loop itself as a phenomenon of observation. This is just a variation of being que being, representing a linear regress in philosophy (2nd law) that exists in and of itself as a linear continuum of definitions.

Phenomenology is not left out however, it is still assumed as a set of axioms.

The question now is where can philosophy be tied together on a set of grounds which do not contradict themselves? We are left with the trillema and all phenomena being defined as variations of the trillema.


Skepdick
Posts: 1846
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Skepdick » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:47 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:38 pm
False, a priori is a description that loops itself considering it must be assumed.
Still trillemma.
A description is a literary/linguistic, or even artistic notion.

You are still focusing on expression.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:38 pm
Phenomenology is not left out however, it is still assumed as a set of axioms.
You are confusing talking about phenomenology with DOING phenomenology. You are still trapped in language.

Do philosophy without speaking. Silence the voice in your head.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 5039
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:51 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:47 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:38 pm
False, a priori is a description that loops itself considering it must be assumed.
Still trillemma.

A description is a literary/linguistic, or even artistic notion - like a painting.

You are still focusing on expression.

And you are progressively deviating into new terms which must contain prior terms through recursion (ie (language -> symbol -> expression) contains as an element language.
You are still following the trillema, 2nd law...but all 3.


Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:38 pm

Phenomenology is not left out however, it is still assumed as a set of axioms.

You are confusing talking about phenomenology with DOING phenomenology.

You are still trapped in language.

False, because language is grounded in symbols with the symbol acting as an intermediary to other phenomenon as symbols in themselves because of there intermediary nature. Under this context all of reality is a language to a certain extent...and none of this contradicts the trillemma.

Skepdick
Posts: 1846
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Skepdick » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:06 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:51 pm
And you are progressively deviating into new terms which must contain prior terms through recursion (ie (language -> symbol -> expression) contains as an element language.
You are still following the trillema, 2nd law...but all 3.
Only because my intent is to externalize it!

Language is the only way to communicate with another mind. Until we invent telepathy anyway.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:38 pm
Under this context all of reality is a language
That is the Logocentric religion. It's idiotic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logocentrism

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 5039
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:33 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:06 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:51 pm
And you are progressively deviating into new terms which must contain prior terms through recursion (ie (language -> symbol -> expression) contains as an element language.
You are still following the trillema, 2nd law...but all 3.
Only because my intent is to externalize it!

Language is the only way to communicate with another mind. Until we invent telepathy anyway.

And those externilizations of symbols, cycle back to your own awareness.

You have a thought.

You manifest it into various symbols (ie language or action as language).

Those symbols cycle back to your pscyhe, constituting a new set of assumptions that exist as recursive variations of the original assumption.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:38 pm
Under this context all of reality is a language
That is the Logocentric religion. It's idiotic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logocentrism

Assumption.

Language or symbol....which comes first? Its relative to the observer and any localization of a co continuum of the two necessitates an inherent connection. Context allows a separation of the two, but context iromically is set tomat continuum of contexts and we are left in a loop.

Symbolism is not limited to logocentricism as logocentricism, due to the 2nd law of the trillema. Eventually progresses to other "centrisms". And "centrisms" is the point here considering it is in, in language, symbolic to a balancing point of awareness. Language, in logocentricism, is a localization of reality under the centerpoint of "language" and as such is self referencing according to the 3rd law, is assumed naturally...as the point is the purest of assumptions...according to law 1, and progressively defines itself and away from itself according to law 2.

You can localize it under the point of logocentrism, but it would be contradictory (ie deficient ina unified totality) relative the the starting point of platonic forms, nietzchian will to power, or even a seperate set of sciences altogether.

All of this follows the trillemma as the trillema sets the grounds for alchemy as the distillitstion of any reality, abstract or empirical, into its essence.


What you fail to realized skepDICK, is that the trillema is the purest form of skepticism there is...from an emotional standpoint it is pure ruthlessness.

Skepdick
Posts: 1846
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Skepdick » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:59 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:33 pm
And those externilizations of symbols, cycle back to your own awareness.

You have a thought. You manifest it into various symbols (ie language or action as language).

Those symbols cycle back to your pscyhe, constituting a new set of assumptions that exist as recursive variations of the original assumption.
The thought caused the symbols. Not the other way around.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:38 pm
Language or symbol....which comes first?
Neither. Language is symbolic.

Skepdick
Posts: 1846
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Post by Skepdick » Thu Aug 08, 2019 12:00 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:33 pm
And those externilizations of symbols, cycle back to your own awareness.

You have a thought. You manifest it into various symbols (ie language or action as language).

Those symbols cycle back to your pscyhe, constituting a new set of assumptions that exist as recursive variations of the original assumption.
The thought caused the symbols. Not the other way around.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:38 pm
Language or symbol....which comes first?
Neither. The intent or desire to express something comes first.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests