Lavender’s 26th banned account said something about observation. Wonder what that was about, we can’t observe that existence is infinite.
Unless “existence is infinite” just means that everything is existence and there is no non-existence. In which case we already knew that, because that’s literally what these words mean by default. Yes, existence is existence.
I wonder how existence being infinite (or existence being existence) would suffice for creating a foundational ontology. Wouldn’t we need more stuff for that?
Maybe he really was just saying that existence is existence?
Nobody knows if existence is infinite or not, or even if the question makes sense. But since it seems absurd to think of existence as being finite, we can just assume it is infinite somehow
Existence is infinite but existence is not life……..Existence and Non Existence are binary, so separate yourself from both existence and non existence.
A binary processing biological machine exists because its needs to exist to claim that it doesn’t exist.It doesn’t exist because it doesn’t possess life.
I exist/I don’t exist (I am) I exist/I don’t exist
The “I am” is separate from binary because the “I am” interprets varying frequency electromagnetic binary energy waves emitted from vibrating matter (which are converted into sounds,visions and sensations) which is held together by balanced attractive and repulsive electromagnetic force absolutes.
Balancing attractive and repulsive electromagnetic force absolutes is the only way that binary data can be produced in the cosmos.
It isn’t claimed to be known. The text is presenting a philosophical framework, a foundational ontology. It is based on observation and argumentation, it isn’t merely asserted knowledge.
It’s a foundational ontology. It isn’t intended to be prescriptive.
It’s a philosophical framework from which specifics can emerge and of which systems can be integrated.
To illustrate let’s take theism for example.
Theism is a theological system in which deity creates the universe. In this case deity is part of existence, the most significant part of existence, and the universe is part of existence. Both are existence.
Both deity and the universe are substantiated as existence because they are perceived or interacted with, at least in part. The system is seamlessly integrated.
It’s a functional ontology. The terms are operational and grounded in real world phenomena providing practical means of substantiation. It isn’t trapped in abstraction like many philosophical frameworks.
The specific phrase you mention, “existence is existence”, is circular for reasons identified in the Definition Of Existence section of the essay. “Existence is existence” is vacuous abstraction, it provides no insight, explanation or means of substantiation.
Illustrate what? Of course both deity and the universe are substantiated as existence, that’s literally just the dictionary definition of existence. We all know that existence is existence. You’ve spent years stretching the dictionary definition of existence to multiple pages and claim to have become famous. Where is the functional ontology?
It’s a sensible inquiry. It’s simply asking “Is existence limited?”
The ontology presents observation and argumentation illustrating existence is unlimited.
As articulated:
For example, existence, defined as:
…is observably an automobile.
However existence is not limited to just one automobile as observably there are other automobiles. But existence is not limited to only automobiles as existence is observably every other thing as well, including roads and buildings.
Existence doesn’t end there. Existence is also the trees, the forest, the air, the wind, the sky, the solar system, the galaxy. Existence is the text on the screen. Existence is the table in the corner of the room. Existence is all. Existence is both part and whole, a tiny little piece and the totality of things.
Only nothing or nonexistence could actually limit existence, however, at no point is nothing or nonexistence present. By principle of interaction any limiting factor would itself be, indicative of existence. Nonexistence is not and cannot be. Existence is infinite.
