Updated.
Favey podcast alert!
yellow conceptual (intellectual faith)
“versus”
red perceptual/phenomenal/intuitional (relational faith)
“versus”
¡active love! — blue
Nerd alert
Subject is value, object is fact, and stupid is as stupid does.
Wasn’t it Monooq that liked/likes Forrest Gump? Vague memory.
Subject is valuing - object is value. (I (the subject) value this orange (value))
Subject is fact. Valuing is fact.
A high form of valuing is love. The exalted subject.
The highest god would be absolute valuing - absolute love.
@Jakob … is that value ontology? It’s very orange. Valuing is blue, valuable/valued is red, value-er is yellow. You got probs with that, maybe you should rap about it.
Anyway.
The necessary world is that which exists in every possible world, including the actual world, and contains to the highest possible degree every actual possibility, including personhood.
Yellow necessary, red possible, blue actual
To say you cannot infer a particular from a universal is like saying you cannot infer an actual possible from a necessary possible.
This feels right. It feels weird that I haven’t done this yet.
I should probably mention that it came on like a lightbulb when I was reading Leibniz.
What came first? The act of demonstration, the property the act was demonstrating, or the object/subject that was acting to demonstrate its property?
The Trinity – division into three, for understanding. The essence is correctness. Two determine the rights of the One. That’s why matter, space, and time. Any two forms determine the third (the one).
ideae, judicia, voluntates - Descartes
At least friggin Brentano understood.
false start? WRONG-O!
Post CAN be empty!
@Jakob hopefully we can continue working on our projects here in ILP. I think the dialogue is a catalyst.
@Jakob’s / Aries’ / @Fixed_Cross’
Value Ontology
update to show better how each is both distinct and one…enabling transformations…
Paging @PZR. Report to ILP for status check.
Three (3) Axioms… Principles… Laws
I’m not tagging you. Keep ignoring me & playing musical sockpuppets.
(1) force. change in quality essence (that’s why Liebniz priors force, because essence/form is eternal, but it’s all three, because omnitemporal & coeternal)
(2) action. the changing action (that which becomes it) a/o in every middle - omnitemporality
(3) position. change in being the object (only ONE never began to exist/be, yet subsumes/suffers all change/becoming— coeternality
Previous translations:
The Three Axioms
-
No object can become greater or smaller without having something added to or subtracted from it.
-
No object to which nothing is either added or subtracted is made greater or smaller.
-
Any object that now is, but previously was not, must have suffered becoming.
The Three Axioms
-
Nothing can become greater or less, either in number or magnitude, while remaining equal to itself.
-
Without addition or subtraction there is no increase or diminution of anything, but only equality.
-
What was not before cannot be afterwards, without becoming and having become.
New labels for the imports/axioms/litmus (forthcoming)… qualitative, active, substantial
Also the three axioms, but out of order…this is blue, yellow, red, but the original order (see last post) is red, blue, yellow:
New labels for the imports/axioms/litmus (forthcoming)… qualitative, active, substantial