I think they are commesurable only in the sense that there is infinity contained within the finite in geometry and in our world

Descartes thought our thoughts of God had a certain perfection that assure of us His existence. This i done in three ways. One, because the idea is to.perfect to come from anyone but God. Two, what is in the mind perfectly must be true objectively. Three is Anselms ontological argument. Descartes uses as there and says God can't let our reason be deceived in understanding the world

Bell's theorem is basically Godel' theorem from a different perspective. There is randomness and uncertainty in the world. But actually the random realm is where free will sits, not controlled by the random, but being a little free

He has no arguments to prove Aquinas was right and Descartes wrong about "substance", yet he accepts it as gospel truth that there is an invisible substance, for one thing

I think that humans are the pinnacle of the material process. The law of karma is in our genes. The universe is only merciful in the sense that it allows us time to rectify our evils. If you don't do that, the law of karma will drag you to hell

He is a fundamentalist Catholic who thinks all philosophies that don't agree with Thomism can be lumped into one theory.

The acetophenone thing is interesting.

If someone, with full knowledge and full consent, does something against their true conscience, the only way to get out of the situation is to do something good that is greater than the evil done. If you put your crime on someone else (Jesus) and sing Amazing grace, or put your crime on everyone else and watch the movie Home, you are screwed

Bill Clinton was a huge fan of Ken Wilbur and Obama has taken up this communal theology. It just as bad as Trump's fundamentalism. I think the universe is about justice. Even Parmenides implied as much. Mercy is a sickly idea invented to Christians who knew they were "sinners". Obama says you can't be saved without everyone else. "I am he as you are me and we all all together." I'm not holding hands with Stalin

Hallucinations limited? Out with the afterlife being eternal then. That's fine. Maybe consciousness can't sustain eternity.

It's interesting, yes. But I do worship matter. Every object around is my idol. It's fun!

They say materialism like us still believe in religion because matter becomes sacred for us

A length that is irrational comes into play when you have a length that is the "smallest" length as the right sides of the triangle. The irrationals are not imaginary numbers. They simply go on forever, within a limit. But that infinity within the spatial limit is still an infinity of points. And half that hypotenuse would be the new true smallest length. It goes on forever, hence Cantor and then Banach and Tarski. I think it's also fishy that with finding the length of the hypotenuse with a length of One on the ride sides, you multiply one times one and get no further than one. I could be wrong about that minor point

I ain't singing kumbaya with Mengele. If you think your him, you're screwed

"No finite thing has genuine existence." Pierce

So not even free will?

"the barbaric conception of personal identity must be broadened" Pierce

I want to know if Catherine is a non-dualist. From my experience with Leo from actualized dot org, the real ones are an amoral-thinking bunch. Leo says an enlightened person can rape and murder; that there is no correlation between the two. This has been around for thousands of years in India, where it is believed either God commits crimes or no crimes can be committed. Hegel is interesting only if his dialectic ends in the key of materialism, on the note of materialism. He says some amoral things in his 1807 book as well. I'm just suspicious of this stuff..

I read that last year. He is biased

One of the links on here says "there is no escape from the fact that one’s presuppositions lead either to a transcendental, participatory philosophy or theology, or else a nihilistic philosophy that creates its own counterfeit theology". When I listen to sitar music I have a nominalistic thoughts. They are very psychedelic, but done without drugs. There is nothing nihilistic about nominalism.

I'm a materialist and very opposed to New Age Ken Wilbur "we are all one" stuff. If you commit a crime, that doesn't make me do it or have done it. Belief is powerful but it doesn't trump the universe. Once someone has done their full measure of evil, they.have nothing to do but wait for hell. There is no consciousness after death, but during death there <a href="http://can.be.an" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">can.be.an</a> eternity. Paradoxes

Absolute space seems obvious. Absolute time, no

There is a world of difference between German romanticism and New Age. The subconscious is the medium between our biology and the conscious agent. But we don't all share one body. And even though there is much power in belief, and Buddhism says to take responsible for your birth, the reality is that you can't reverse the path. You have to amend the past. There is no other way. If a band of cannibals formed a fuzzy united ball together, the new "reality" doesn't change.what they did.

Freudian slip

The elephant in the room is the New Age using The Secret to deny fundamental reality. Omg the elephant is taking a dump

A rod is real and can be divided infinitely. Lines are just our way of mulling over the world in our brains

Your just creating an Obama big shining star for everyone to get lost in and have orgies!

Studies on biology can never take away the truth of free will and wrongdoing, even if we have to adopt compatabilism as our option.

Peter Lynds simply rehashed Bergson on Zeno. Time is not a thing, so dividing it is rather arbitrary. The paradox of Zeno is about the line segment itself, not just about the motion. Maybe Bergson answers the motion part. But he doesn't show how it is not a contradiction for a line segment to be both infinite and finite in the same respect

I don't believe in God. I have speculated about a Sol Invictus, but there is not evidence of him. Hindusim, it is true, usually doesn't have koans. Which is why it is usually escapist spiritualism. Reincarnation is not real. You are you, not everyone. I have no respect for Christianity because they make an innocent person into their scapegoat. It's clearly immoral. Trying to merge with every is just as bad however. At least I have respect though for people who sense there might be a God and are willing to follow him, just so long as they don't expect him to take away their responsibility.

I for one accept the reality of the world as we perceive it. It's a round triangle of a world and I think thats cool

This is just Hinduism without the koan. It's mushy spiritualism, without even the sense there is a God your communicating with

Synechism "denies that all is merely ideas, likewise that all is merely matter, and mind–matter dualism." Uh, so then everything thing is a super-spiritual entity? This wanting to merge with everything else is an escape tactic from one's conscience, as I see it. No different from trying to merge with Jesus in Christianity

See Ehrlich, Philip (2006), "The rise of non-Archimedean mathematics and the roots of a misconception." Calculus tried to overthrow Archimedes in at the end of the 18 hundreds and beyond.

Matter has the property of the Continuum and Continuity. That is why there is a contradiction in matter, which we should adore ("I worship my own eyes" says the guru in Zen Pivots). This in no way leads to a spiritual not based on the material

I think Mapping the Medium is a supporter of the freaky doctrines of Time Freke and Ken Wilbur.

Objects have matter and form in them. There is the atoms, and there is the arrangement into shape. But what of the shape of the atoms? The process goes on forever, so there IS matter and form. They are not distinguishable (enter Descartes) But the Aquinas doctrine of substances adds another, false, aspect to it. Things don't have an invisible substance of whoses' extension is an accident. Material things are defined by the the cohesion they have. Everything else is culture and psychology. This is strict materialism. Because of the marriage between finitude and infinity, everything is an indeterminate form, in the philosophical and in the mathematical sense.

The road of fear of the Void within the contradiction of Matter is superior to the way of beauty of the forms and natures. The compressions of calculus are platonic day dreams. Name one thing smart pierce said about Zeno

Believing in natures is random. It depends on culture and psychology

Hegel was much more explicit about the spiritual than Spinoza, but I understand Hegel as neologism, so the spiritual is nothingness, the flip side of the coin. The other side is sacred matter

Spinoza has to be understood from his time period. People understood him as a materialist who was merely pointing out the holiness and sacrality of matter through obscure geometric arguments. Nondualists like actualized dot org don't believe in sin or true crime because they think we are the supernatural God

The spiritual is founded on the material. Even teilhard leaned in this direction

Was Spinoza holding us back? Purpose has nothing to do with science, and synthesis in natures has nothng to do with the infinite divisibilty of the finite

If the Plank length has any length at all, it has a front and back. Divide further. The descent goes on forever in a finite space. Hence our contradiction.

"In reality, space is therefore amorphous, a flaccid form, without rigidity, which is adaptable to everything, it has NO properties of its own. To geometrize is to study the properties of our instruments, that is, of solid bodies." Poincare

The division goes on forever. Physics assigns a lowest limit we can fathom. Gee are you guys computers, or just think with Hobbean calculation? Computers cannot fully deal with the finite and the infinity in relation to space. It doesn't have reason so it can't know what those things mean. They "think" along the lines of Hibert's geometry. Zeno's paradox otoh leads directly the paradox of the large and the small. How can you ever get to the small when where ever you go you simply enter more of the large?