Mowk wrote:I don't agree, stasis is what it is. Whether perception is accurate or not. Some may see stasis but that is as illusion of a time frame, or a particularly timely point of reference. If it has moved a centimeter in an eon it is not still, static. if it has moved a meter it is less so. Movement in the cosmos negates any lack of perception of relative movement, or the lack there of. I'm not seeing any human contribution as cosmically relevant. A fairly small pool to sample from.
Mowk wrote:No thing, and many ideas.
Meno_ wrote:Mowk wrote:No thing, and many ideas.
No thing and many ideas , where ideas = nothing's? Or, are ideas something, where things ~ no things . (where ~ means relational)
& things could be x, y, z, or any symbol.
Or/& are symbols need not be even visual clues . they could be auditory, >>
https://youtu.be/84VIZ6d0nUk<<?
Or, below that without organic life, still
the void ?
But here is the problem.
If IT is what IT is, then what it is is also IT, and that is, by virtue of being it, IS also , and therefore if, (and only of) IT must be eternal, therefore it is also eternal.
Therefore, if it is because of IT, even if IT is no thing, it must be both . (some thing & no thing)
Where ideas ~ no ideas .
Where ~ and. -(~) are some or no thing.
Because they are both static and potentially still.
The only thing which satisfies all of the above is a vanishing point and/or an infinity of them in ONE that are at once are STILL and/or ; and/and resonate.
Now, Mowk
If all the above means nothing: that is merely Your own existential prerogative, so
Agreeing or not is part and parcel of it !
This is Rockport a tee bit from Mono Lake, where we will be heading soon.
So he goes biked through here and there, met a guy in Rome and after crisscrossing Hungary he went back to Rome and gave the bike to his friend.
Chewed the fat for a while, (about 20 sentences in about as many minutes)
Told him o spent time in a small town where there were no cars except horses and buggies and a slow summer life with one picture show.
Continue in a min.
Mowk wrote:I don't know about eternal. Could be just an idea. If something can become then it didn't exist before it became.
Mowk wrote:The eternal present? Tense is a manner of a languages description of events that take place in time. That there is an eternal present is simply a mechanism of tense.
Do you get full? And once you are full are you never hungry again? I don't think so.
Even as it is, always in flux. Not static; flowing. I don't really have a difference of opinion with you, and I do.
Meno_ wrote:Emptier . then ..again.
Way better swing.
Better
Not to.
Ok. better sleep . it off.
Mowk wrote:More of the same from Meno_. No, I am not disappointed.
DIY.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users