142857,
And thanks for reading my posts instead of ignoring them
.
It's due to an unusual form of Asperger and rather severe dyspraxia that I speak and think like this. But I do so very consciously: entirely conscious of the thought processes, I just don't need to plan/organize them.
Like you and almost everyone else (perhaps), I was fed with this question during infancy:
"If the Universe is the answer, what is the question?"
It never took crystallized intelligence (or worse, rote classroom, book-bound learning) for me to be able to answer this.
The answer is simple: actually, the Universe neither has an outside nor an inside (imagine a Klein bottle, which has topological existence, but without 'metricity' (global metric structure)), and so the question is none other than the answer, but neither the question nor the answer is the Universe. In other words, both the question and the answer are nullified since this is necessarily the very beginning of logic: it is self-emptying without negation of its Super-Set, { }, the Intellect an sich and Existence an sich.
And so, the Universe is neither ultimately physical nor merely mental/informational, although all intelligible categories are none other than itself (but not equivalent to it). So, what is it? No words, just the 'self-eyeing' Universe (with big U), otherwise just called Noumena, Nous.
It's like a mirror and the things seen reflected there. Are they IN the mirror? Do they exist there? No: this is where injective logic emerges as soon as you look into it (the mirror) and also ends as soon as you transcend it by 'looking elsewhere, deeper, beyond, into the self-dual Mind Itself'---and not/never in any opposing irrationality---or, as some might say, 'within the within'. Yet where else do they (phenomena) appear/take place if not in the mirror? By 'mirror' I do not simply mean gross physical existence but the whole Universe as a tautological continuum that appears non-diffusive only due to the Intellect (with big I), inherent in itself. This whole universal continuum, in turn, is capable of giving rise to discrete multiverses (instead of universes) when the notion of 'scale' is first introduced (as a 'Kantian category').
I won't give the pan-Hellenic details here for they are manifestly nothing but a near-empty set: a diagonal, unimodular 'hyper-matrix' consisting of an infinite number of the pair (0, 1) with 'determinant' (absolute value) 1 and unrestricted rank (genus), signifying the supremacy of Existence (That-Which-Is) over an infinite range of null sets.
Further, I can only say that (as I can trust discrete jumps and what's beyond them when it comes to your special mind) the conclusion is this: If Existence weren't the way It Really Is In Itself (as The Singularity without objects of knowledge as well as without rank/determination in Itself, but which necessarily manifests them consequentially, if and when manifestation takes place), both existence and non-existence would NOT exist, or, as a secondary self-proving corollary, existence and non-existence would be completely equivalent at ALL ontological, contingent levels, which is absurd.
As I said earlier, That is not an object of belief at all. Neither is That a subject of belief. Why? Simply because Existence is self-distinct and encompasses both Itself and Its direct otherness (non-existence) at the first level of logic, where the objects of knowledge first arise as part of the first transfinite multiplicity within Unity. This way, Existence is always dissimilar to categorical phenomena at all subsequent levels, including Its own primary noetic attributes (although denying them in the first category would amount to denying Existence Itself; for this reason logic can never be denied (and so let the mind evolve, please, don't banish it!), if it ever has to disappear then it shall disappear 'within/into itself' and not elsewhere), whether they exist as purely abstract principles or concrete objects usually tangible to all sentient beings.
What about rationality? It depends on the 'substance' of the intellect and so we can say that when we can cognize at once That-Which-Is, ourselves, and the Universe (including its generals and particulars), the Ratio is simply perfected and fulfilled but NEVER negated (hence any mere mythic-dogmatic religion is ultimately wrong in the very beginning and is 'not even wrong' anywhere near Reality).
Hence: { } is the symbol for That-Which-Is (Pure Existence), whose substantial Image is the Nous (Pure Intellect), and whose Mirror is the Universe. It is in the Universe, this Mirror, that { } sees Itself phenomenally, through the noumenal Nous.
Both noumena (tacit, intuitive, pre-systematic underpinnings) and phenomena (such as those of philosophy and 'hardcore' science), as categories of knowledge, are encompassed by that 'conspansive' Ratio capable of both singularity/contraction and duality (multiplicity)/expansion by means of substantial, non-phenomenal 'effusion'.
And so, with respect to the Pure Intellect (the Monad that sees (is conscious of) all things without being attached to them) I'd rather call things 'surjects' (instead of 'subjects' and 'objects') and refer to Reality as 'surjective' (instead of 'subjective' and 'objective'). But that's another 'boring' thing ^_^.
Only now can I doubly gladly say to you (you're the smart fellow), thanks for existing!
Evar, I love reading your posts.
Sometimes I only have to read your posts 2 or 3 times to understand them. Sometimes even that doesn't help, but even when I haven't the foggiest what you are talking about I feel enlightened just by having read your post.
Either way it is obvious that you are a smart fellow, and your thinking is very deep and on another plane entirely.
