To ask such a question seems to presuppose that there is only one "way" or "mode" of existence. — darthbarracuda
I didn't want to imply something like that. So, are there different ways of existing? Do these ways have something in common? — mew
But the question remains: are all these different ways only ontically different? Are they unified ontologically? — darthbarracuda
I'm afraid I don't understand the question :s — mew
A holographic pattern within universal waves would be the defining aspect of existence, but one must first embrace the holographic model of the universe and memory. — Rich
Are they all "unified' in the sense that they all exist in the same fundamental ontological way? — darthbarracuda
Are they all "unified' in the sense that they all exist in the same fundamental ontological way? — darthbarracuda
I'm also reading a book which says that causes do not exist! Patterns exist. If causes do not exist, then to exist is not to be causally relevant. If we accept patterns exist instead of causes, would it make sense to say that to exist is to be part of a pattern? — mew
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.