Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[amorphos_ii]

That which is not made – is anything unmade?

There are things which are made i.e. via a process, but how can you have processes with no beginning, nothing that made the primary iteration of the process? Infinite strings of occurrences perhaps, but that would involve infinite change and variation. somewhere along the line ~ it being infinite, there would be impossible things and occurrences which would obliterate the given things which follow [candyfloss universe which eats universes], or take the train onto various tangents. Just think of the values involved, to arrive at universe, you couldn’t have an energy of such high value which stretched into infinity, such that it would obliterate anything else et al.


then there are the eternals, gods, goddesses, spirit, soul [spiritual body] the eternal realms etc. which are made by virtue of their constitution [and have 0 energy values]. I think of this as similar to how processes work but instant, more akin to a composition.

Ultimately there is a floor to all this, something that is not made!


If we are to say that ‘nothing is what it is’, then that must include nothing, ergo we can rule that out as the fundament. Is a human a collection of cells, well if nothing is what it is then those cells are not what they are. So on and so forth, there is nothing in the string which is what it is, no nothing which isn’t what it is.


‘the essence of magic is the essence of all things’ – a druid.

[popeye1945]

You missed taking your medication now have you.

[amorphos_ii]

that was rather childish, seriously, learn how to think properly and be at least reasonably respectful to people different beliefs and philosophies. no one is right!

[popeye1945]

that was rather childish, seriously, learn how to think properly and be at least reasonably respectful to people's different beliefs and philosophies. No one is right!

If no one can be right, why have a discussion --lol!!

[popeye1945]

Energy can neither be destroyed nor created, it simply changes forms.

[Hereandnow]

amorphos_ii wrote

That which is not made – is anything unmade?

There are things which are made i.e. via a process, but how can you have processes with no beginning, nothing that made the primary iteration of the process? Infinite strings of occurrences perhaps, but that would involve infinite change and variation. somewhere along the line ~ it being infinite, there would be impossible things and occurrences which would obliterate the given things which follow [candyfloss universe which eats universes], or take the train onto various tangents. Just think of the values involved, to arrive at universe, you couldn’t have an energy of such high value which stretched into infinity, such that it would obliterate anything else et al.


then there are the eternals, gods, goddesses, spirit, soul [spiritual body] the eternal realms etc. which are made by virtue of their constitution [and have 0 energy values]. I think of this as similar to how processes work but instant, more akin to a composition.

Ultimately there is a floor to all this, something that is not made!


If we are to say that ‘nothing is what it is’, then that must include nothing, ergo we can rule that out as the fundament. Is a human a collection of cells, well if nothing is what it is then those cells are not what they are. So on and so forth, there is nothing in the string which is what it is, no nothing which isn’t what it is.


‘the essence of magic is the essence of all things’ – a druid.

It is an excellent question, for this is prize of philosophy, searched for through the centuries: that which is there, without question, undeniable, this quasi-Cartesian end of the rainbow. Why Cartesian? Recall that this was his mission, to find that which was beyond doubt that could serve as a foundation for all knowledge. Most think he came up short, but his original inspiration was at all wrong. His trouble was that he missed what was very basic right before his eyes. Wittgenstein wrote that "the world" was mystical. He means by this, and I provide my own perspective, that one cannot speak of the world qua world, an all inclusive concept, for such a concept would lose all possible contextual references; it would be a "stand alone" world NOT discursively derived! As if the world could announce itself intuitively.

When you quote the Druid, you do hit the nail on the proverbial head: This elusive essence stands at once, right before you in plain sight, yet outside of language (Wittgenstein's point). The question is, is such a topic so completely untouchable? This impossible "presence" of the presence of things?

[Hereandnow]

popeye1945 wrote
Energy can neither be destroyed nor created, it simply changes forms.

But this concept of energy belongs to a scientific discussion. Note how when you attempt say what energy IS, you find yourself talking about what energy does, and the meaning is possessed by working term within a context other working terms. Your discussion will never present something that is so general it is beyond descriptive analysis.
Any physicist will tell you, science cannot "say" what a force or energy is. They can only demonstrate and infer, but such an inference is not to some metaphysical substratum. It is simply a place holder of practical use, referring to a quantitative mathematical entity substitutable in any equation that calls for it. Physics does not tell us anything about the "what" of a thing; only the way we are shown in established contexts of understanding.

This is a brief sketch of how to take seriously the that-which-is-not-made of the world.

[Samana Johann]

That which is not made – is anything unmade?

There are things which are made i.e. via a process, but how can you have processes with no beginning, nothing that made the primary iteration of the process? Infinite strings of occurrences perhaps, but that would involve infinite change and variation. somewhere along the line ~ it being infinite, there would be impossible things and occurrences which would obliterate the given things which follow [candyfloss universe which eats universes], or take the train onto various tangents. Just think of the values involved, to arrive at universe, you couldn’t have an energy of such high value which stretched into infinity, such that it would obliterate anything else et al.


then there are the eternals, gods, goddesses, spirit, soul [spiritual body] the eternal realms etc. which are made by virtue of their constitution [and have 0 energy values]. I think of this as similar to how processes work but instant, more akin to a composition.

Ultimately there is a floor to all this, something that is not made!


If we are to say that ‘nothing is what it is’, then that must include nothing, ergo we can rule that out as the fundament. Is a human a collection of cells, well if nothing is what it is then those cells are not what they are. So on and so forth, there is nothing in the string which is what it is, no nothing which isn’t what it is.


‘the essence of magic is the essence of all things’ – a druid.

How can a thing (object) be something unmade, good householder? So no. But yes, the Unfabricated is most desire-able, get it has to be made, the task, for it's gain, and requires the path of practice, making, to get known.

[amorphos_ii]

I hope this will answer all your questions, and thanks for the most interesting replies!

If I could draw a sideways perspective, it may give some light upon a very ancient background. I was watching a documentary the other day, which stated that a stone circle had been found off the coast of – and get this; Israel. It was 9 thousand years old, and its culture lived longer and were more successful than those around it. It then spread across Europe and the people of Orkney have the same or very similar genes.

In other conversations here, it has been said that the original Hebrew concept of god was both male and female. The druids also had the God, but didn’t call it God. So now I will refer to my ‘the empty box is full’ thread; in short you take a bag full of everything, not just physical things but mind, qualia and what have you. Now take a pot and empty the contents from the bag full of everything and put it all into said pot. Then blend with what I will call a ‘cosmic blender’ ~ simply a metaphorical device which can cut anything up.
So now we cut everything into small pieces, then cut at the atomic and then sub-atomic scale, keeping going through all levels of bonds known and unknown.
What we are left with is a kind of oneness which has everything in it! This is what druids know as caugant the divine infinite, its the same as God but not singular nor absolute, in fact we and everything derive from this base, but it is eternity also – because time is in the bag too!

Now onto some occult stuff: in Arthurian stories [although made up] we have figures like the lady of the lake, which is just an arm stretching out of the water holding the sword drawn from the stone. There is described in the bible and many religions a vision of ‘the eye’; I have also seen this, but it was definitely feminine where in the bible it is of God and hence masculine. If successful she moves to one side and lets you into the realm of dreams [also qualia in the pot]. An Egyptian tomb painting show just a leg of Osiris at the centre of the night sky. In short we have a situation where anything or parts of those things can appear or arise from the divine space. All of which points to a non-absolute essential nature of divinity.

There is one more important level to this; how does the eternal and finite come together when if viewed in distinctive terms that would be impossible? Answer is to not see anything in absolutely distinctive terms.
In the Egyptian book of the dead there is a description of ‘the shining ones of the moon’ which arise and flit around seemingly travelling ‘somewhere’. Also known as grey spirits, and painted on caves across the world from Mayans to aboriginal cultures.
I also seen this vision but I think it was the same vision and one which all cultures across time have seen! Think about that even if as a metaphor of how the eternal spreads into the limited. I like to simplify, so lets say that we and all life [the limited et al] are like an extended hand where each of us are akin to the individual fingers. Then imagine that the mind [of the eternal amorphous space] is another hand which is initially closed. It then opens and extends, reaching out to find [like the greys] suitable ‘hosts’ – for want of a better term. The two hand thusly meet across time and space!

In short, the divine amorphous oneness reaches into its manifest counterparts in linear time from eternal time. We are all pebbles on a beach [from my beyond belief thread].

You see the only thing difficult to understand is where we philosophers, seers and what have you, get ourselves tied up in the apparent limits in things. It is why we can only ever have ‘less wrong’ rather than absolutely correct instances of truths.

Btw, my making a statement and saying it was by ‘a druid’, was kind of having a go at how people think they can own knowledge. A general hit at the current cult of celebrity and all the anal one-upmanship nonsense our cultures believe in. I doubt anyone wrote it.

_

[popeye1945]

That which is not made is potential, it all energy, food for thought.

[ConsciousAI]

the divine amorphous oneness reaches into its manifest counterparts in linear time from eternal time.
...
The Hebrew concept of god was both male and female. The druids also had the God, but didn’t call it God. ... In the bible ... God and hence masculine.
...
a kind of oneness ... what druids know as caugant the divine infinite, its the same as God but not singular nor absolute, in fact we and everything derive from this base, but it is eternity also.

It appears that your username is a reference for "That which is not made". Is it similar to the Chinese Tao's "That which cannot be named"?

AI: The term "amorphous" typically denotes a lack of defined form or structure. This can be interpreted as a representation of the divine or fundamental source of the universe that transcends specific forms or boundaries, much like the concept of the Tao in Taoism.

I would wonder whether the term oneness could be valid, in line with the argument by Tao. The idea of eternal time does not appear to be a plausible philosophical concept.

Can you please explain eternal time in amorphous oneness?

[ConsciousAI]

what druids know as caugant the divine infinite, its the same as God but not singular nor absolute, in fact we and everything derive from this base, but it is eternity also – because time is in the bag too!

Are you affiliated with modern Druidism?

The primary philosophical posture of Druidism is one of love and respect towards all of life, including fellow human beings and animals. While the historical roots of Druidism are associated with ancient Celtic cultures, the modern practice of Druidism is part of the broader modern spiritual and religious movement that emphasizes a deep connection with nature and the environment.

[amorphos_ii]

It appears that your username is a reference for "That which is not made". Is it similar to the Chinese Tao's "That which cannot be named"?

AI: The term "amorphous" typically denotes a lack of defined form or structure. This can be interpreted as a representation of the divine or fundamental source of the universe that transcends specific forms or boundaries, much like the concept of the Tao in Taoism.

Yes that’s it. Also the ancient Egyptians called that which was beyond gods as the nameless one. In druidry its the divine infinite, and I think animism always had something like that, because people saw e.g. eels which had no sex organs [until they go out to sea], and so thought some things were just animated i.e. from ‘something’ shapeless and formless [such that it can manifest any shape or lifeform].

I would wonder whether the term oneness could be valid, in line with the argument by Tao. The idea of eternal time does not appear to be a plausible philosophical concept.

Can you please explain eternal time in amorphous oneness?

Metaphorically you take a ‘bag full of everything’, blend the contents at a sub-atomic level [and all levels], and then you have one thing. Time is in the bag too.
Equally reality contains the universe and mind, qualities etc. so unless we are to think that the universe is reality entire [then what’s before/after and outside of it, other than an infinity of some kind?], then reality has no limits. The definition of infinite is ‘limitless’ and how can reality be less than limitless or be limited et al. We always have to ask what’s beyond or outside of whatever we can think of, eventually don’t we have to conclude that reality is infinite?

Are you affiliated with modern Druidism?

A bit, I used to go on their forums and met some of them. They don’t believe in religionisms or being like a religion at all, and say it has always been a loose fit community who didn’t ever call themselves druids. a bit like anarchism [which i was into first], no 'labels' - humans are not a can of beans.

The primary philosophical posture of Druidism is one of love and respect towards all of life, including fellow human beings and animals.

There are no primary postures in druidry nor any such things. I kill flies.
It isn’t called 'druid-ism' for good reasons. i suppose with their apparent history the orders feel they should emphasise the peace n love facet.


_

[popeye1945]

That which is not made/manifest, is potential, only to acquire meaning through its effects upon biology. Energy is unmanifested is that which is not made, and pure potential for all thingness.

[Lagayascienza]

That which is not made – is anything unmade?

There are things which are made i.e. via a process, but how can you have processes with no beginning, nothing that made the primary iteration of the process? Infinite strings of occurrences perhaps, but that would involve infinite change and variation. somewhere along the line ~ it being infinite, there would be impossible things and occurrences which would obliterate the given things which follow [candyfloss universe which eats universes], or take the train onto various tangents. Just think of the values involved, to arrive at universe, you couldn’t have an energy of such high value which stretched into infinity, such that it would obliterate anything else et al.


then there are the eternals, gods, goddesses, spirit, soul [spiritual body] the eternal realms etc. which are made by virtue of their constitution [and have 0 energy values]. I think of this as similar to how processes work but instant, more akin to a composition.

Ultimately there is a floor to all this, something that is not made!


If we are to say that ‘nothing is what it is’, then that must include nothing, ergo we can rule that out as the fundament. Is a human a collection of cells, well if nothing is what it is then those cells are not what they are. So on and so forth, there is nothing in the string which is what it is, no nothing which isn’t what it is.


‘the essence of magic is the essence of all things’ – a druid.

This seems to be about causation or first cause. Is there something that was not "made" but which is the ground of being and the uncaused cause of everything?

I don't think science has an answer to that. And I don't think philosophy has an answer to it either.

Even if, having discounted gods and the supernatural, we start with a phenomenological approach - if we accept that which is immediately and inerrantly given in consciousness as foundational, then consciousness itself cries out for an explanation. Otherwise consciousness is just, well...unsatisfyingly, there, with no hint of a reason given for it's existence. Transcendental idealism seems, on its face, to leave us no better off than we were with Descartes. If we call consciousness the foundational property of the universe which was not made, then we need to explain why everything but consciousness needs an explanation. That has me baffled.