SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: jttmab who wrote (65694)5/16/2006 1:19:03 AM
From: one_less  Read Replies (1) of 173976
 
You have suggested that a valid observation on the concept of time is that it is a dimension. As such it is not limited, at least in the usual temporal definition of limits. Consideration of this dimensional view then suggests the infinite and because it is 'time', infinity translates to 'eternal'. I have already demonstrated how past and future can be viewed most realistically as past-present and future-present. Based on the same rationale, I can now conclude from your statement that eternal-present is a valid concept for us to agree upon.

The moisture/tree analogy serves me now. We can see that moisture is practical as an essential quality in every living cell and operation of the tree. It is only that we are able to view moisture outside the tree (a rain drop) that we can agree that moisture is not dependent on the tree for it's existence; in fact, we can determine quite the contrary. And, that the source of moisture is beyond the tree and not explainable by observations of only the interior aspects of the tree. The same analogy can be driven with the four philos elements of fire/water/air/earth. This is a rational explanation of how life which permeates the being of every creature could have a source not dependent on the temporal and observable universe.

So with time, distance, space, and matter we have your dimensions that, although practical in the temporal sense, also have their etherial perspectives of infinitude.

And what of thought as form and dimension? Do such things exist outside of self awareness? Your method of having things and phenomenon observed by others and confirmed through scientific method suggest that thought as form and dimension do in fact exist apriori to self awareness of the ideas themselves.

Do ideas have value as form and dimension? I see no reason why the same rules would not apply. So common recognition of concepts such as generousity as a 'good' value and 'corruption' as a bad value is not surprising and should be valid as proof unto itself. Proof that is confirmed by nearly universal acceptence among rational self-aware persons. The validity of self-evidence springs from this. Hat tip to Jefferson.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News