The question of duality and non-duality arises. What takes precedence, the One or each consciousness living in history?

Well, it depends if space is continuous or discrete. Which one do you pick — MoK

Discrete doesn't get lost in itself but takes the step further

How would you describe that reforming process? Or any kind of redemption — frank

Any true love should take away any guilt-karma an individual might have. I remember reading that the Duns Scotus school of thought teach that all sin is finite internally although it offends an "infinite" God externally from. This idea of infinity itself is starting to bother me

am talking about the decimal part of a number. Consider a very small number with many 0 digits and a 1 at the end, like, 0.0...01, where the number of 0 digits is M. If you divide this number by 2 you get, 0.0...05 where the number of 0 digits is M+1. You can do this forever — MoK

There is no problem when you do it with numbers. The trouble is when infinite digits are linked to spatial slices

Each digit represents a slice of space hence infinite space. Of all the arguments i've amassed over the years, the one that says "something can't be discrete because that implies space which implies parts/slices, and so the descent" has to go. There has to be a basic unit.

Why must motion be infinitily divided? How can you fit infinity in the bounds of anything finite?

I'm reading The Best of All Possible Worlds by Stephen Nadler and he says Leibniz was fascinated by the Cartesian revolution in natural philosophy but thought going back to parts of Aristotle was important. He seemed to believe in forms as kinds of living energies. Descartes ascribed motion to the concept of tension, like in a clock. The universal vortex with the infinite vortexes within unfolded its tension, let go by God in the beginning, creating the cascading motion into the future. Leibniz believed in infinite monads and but needed a metaphysical unity to keep objects as individual. He worked on the idea of the continuum as early as 1671 in his New Physical Hypothesis and had generally more proto-Romantic ideas of nature than the Cartesians

Infinity is not distinct enough an idea to have an essence.

I've recently discovered myself as a radical finitist. Nothing is infinite above, in, or below heaven. I think the concept itself is a self-contradictory idea that is badly attached to theological theorems

The "simple' is the One of Plato and the noumena of Kant. We create our realities. Many scientists believe the world is not actual until consciousness collapses the wave function. I doubt they can prove their interpretation, but it is a modern verson of Kant without Newton's Euclidean approach (which Kant was so obsessed with)

The "simple" has no space hence it is nowhere. Matter is everywhere there is a where and matter is love.

attune to the body feeling.
1h — ENOAH

Will and Ideas are ideas. That is, ideas about Idea. We are all on a planet whirling around the "sol invictus", late Roman title for the sun within their planet worshipping world. (They borrowed much from Greece) The only way to speak in discursive method about things mystical/spiritual is to call the "simple" at the start. You can still imagine them and actually see ithem without the eyes. Here and now, living the now as all reality, we are biolog8cal creatures, with many organs ect. Feelings in rhe body are in predetermined sinc with the "simple" world

is also the Hebrew אֱמוּנָה (emunah) which is a dynamic and fluid concept that's also multi-directional. A popular Jewish prayer said in the morning is Modeh Ani which ends with "raba emunatech" - "great is your faithfuless" - that is, great is God's faithfulness towards us. Through — BitconnectCarlos

It's interesting how music arises different "Gods" in the mind in the way art does.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cW4pNx4FjXo&pp=ygUQMzAwMCB5ZWFyIG1lbG9keQ%3D%3D

This sounds like a God that longs. Not Aquinas's God

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2OBB5-bP6qs&pp=ygUYZ3JlZ29yaWFuIGNsYXJ2b3VlIGNoYW50

That expresses God the Father

These different ways of understanding God brings to mind many religious ideas for me

Feelings are something that people exclude from God or Allah. They are "holy" or too "sublime" for feelings, for the mushy. All that is holy is only one, that's what holy means. Feelings are what is alive in anything

usually incompatible — 180 Proof

Why do you say "usually"? Just curious

It gets points for sanity though — frank

Sometimes and it gets points for reforming sinners. But for all you know Jesus will come back someday and say "i felt no pain on the cross and i give you no merits. Be damned for the sins you confessed to". Christians have no evidence that won't happen

Science, as Hume proved, is always contingent. Is this quark causing that? Why not that electron thru the quark. The cause of causality is noumena and is never presented. Any prediction science makes can be wrong. Philosophy deals with eternal life and eternal truths. If science conflicts with that, reject that part of science and dont think about it anymore. Life is too short. The only thing never changing is Him

Through restoring our souls to our bodies each morning and giving us another day God shows his faithfulness towards us — BitconnectCarlos

That's a beautiful sentiment

God almighty came down from heaven to save us from his own wrath by allowing himself to be tortured to death. This strategy worked, — frank

This does not work because it is against karma and justice to substitute atonment. Get your theology right

Will and Ideas refer to the metaphysical realities which our psychology comes from. In classical theism, God does not suffer. But classical freedom is refuted in that God would change if he created the world from nothing. His knowledge of himself creating would produce a change in him sunce he is one with his thoughts. If we ourselves are the ground of being, it's just will that makes the world what it is. Will guided by thoughts, but will nevertheless

Why is intuition esoteric? In what sense? Do you think it makes sense — Corvus

In the history of Christianity, for example, the orthodoxy emphasized using reason to prove God's existence while the mystics spoke of intuition and being one with God. See the article on intuition in the Catholic encyclopedia (new advent website) for more information. I am not against reason, but there are higher levels i believe. Nous is higher than logos, dialectic above understanding

Philosophy trumps science every time. Science is what is dumb

It seems to me that there has to be a first pair of humans from which our 7 billion come from. Evolution too strides recklessly through the gates of Zeno's paradoxes. Mathematics itself is inpossible without basic units. You have to be speaking about something. If the human ancestry went back into time forever there could never be a person now. Forget using the kalam. Humans into the infinite past and beyond is obviously impossible and since it is accidental whether there be humans within the "eternal" universe than it follows that an eternal past is impossible. Forget about time having eternity to complete infinity. That is just math. Biology is psycho-organic and the post modern world has a real problem with the concept of origins

"Sublime and Living Will! named by no name, compassed by no thought! I may well raise my soul to Thee, for Thou and I are not divided."
J.G. Fichte, The Vocation of Man

How does your continuous fluidity doctrine fare against criticism like Kant's second antinomy. There are clearly units

I think I know what you are saying but please provide your favorite example of such a thing — Paine

https://www.britannica.com/topic/double-truth-theory

I have literally never had those thoughts in my head before

I'm not sure i get your point(s). Men and women complete each other because they have what they lack themselves. The physical isn't hard to understand. Whether one has a male soul or a female soul or if Spirit is feminine or male, nonetheless, all that takes wisdom to understand. It's hard also not to jump to conclusions

My position is that absolute truth is Freedom, Will. That can be the answer to the problem of pain. If God is sitting up there infinitely happy as we suffer, trying to perfect ourselves, how does that reflect a beautiful world? I think we make the world what it is in some sense, "positing" everything and each other, as Fichte said.. Why is there pain? There is no reason really. It's just free. So the Ideas guide the Will, but the Will is in charge

I don't think that there is such a thing as innate knowledge. What we call thinking is a trial and error process. We take one root and proceed. It might be fruitful or we might reach a dead end without any conclusion. Therefore, will is blind — MoK

How can will be without thoughts? Have you considered Platonic Forms?

Is that what he said? I thought the world was sheer will and our experience was just representation, hence the title "Will and Representation". Will is the naturre of Kant's thing in itself — prothero

Well for him Will is real, is noumena. Experience is just empirical

world don't care about us, and it goes its own ways. But we do what we can — Corvus

What do you think of Schopenhauer when he says the world IS our Will? And have you ever listened to Jim Newman the non-dualist? He's got lots of stuff on youtube. He's ideas are fascinating in light of Schopenhauer

Well reality is not relative to the body. We don't know the future however. As Hume argues, the sun may not rise tomorrow. Who is to say what butterfly effected that? Where do we empirically find the prime mover of caused events?

I would say on one side there is full male-ness and feminity on the other. Most people are all man or all woman. There are some who are both or neither. They are all equally human and sexuality is a nature. It's just that it can be combined in novel ways.

And I don't think women need you to defend them via Neitszche. They run the world anyway lol

No. It is called realism — Corvus

What's the difference?

Faith itself doesn't do anything, It is just beliefs on something. To move mountains, you must hire some cranes and bulldozers, and dig them out with your own labor — Corvus

That's the perspective of materialism yes

Failing to recognize the fact that they are the same allows the religious bigotry endemic here on the forum to draw mislead conclusions — T Clark

Well this relates to my number 2 question. I think the East talks about faith in terms of intuition and certain Western philosophers do as well. Orthodoxy frowns on intuition more often than reason because it is seen as esoteric

And for Nietzsche the rope between two things makes them essentially one and the same, it's what he calls the dangerous perhaps. (BGE 2)

Thus human is the rope between man and woman. Because of the teleological cause — DifferentiatingEgg

Is this about how many sexes there are?

Man and woman start from the same place as a human being. They are equally human was my point. Their brains work differently though. If you are asking why i thought women tend to be more wicked than men even though it's all from a will free from compulsion, i would have to answer with something about fate, free will, and predestination but that would be very difficult to discuss. You might know what your child will do even though it is free. We shouldn't put chains around the doctrine of liberty.

Thinking is based on faith? Hegel said that in his latter lectures on the proofs for God. Will has control over the intellect though, which is one reason i think the intellect is not the superior faculty.. Will is never blind. There is a certain innate knowledge pure will by itself without input from the intellect

. Faith is also underlying motive for the actions aiming at certain achievements or enlightenment. Faith is not purposeless — Corvus

Yes i think all religions point to faith. There are times when i believe faith can literally move mountains, but my mind is never strong enough to endure the confusion. OCD addiction to thinking i suppose