« Why are "Islamists" more worrisome than "Christianists"? | Main | Religious stories are too wonderful to be true »

November 29, 2011


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Regarding empty paper bag 3, or using it as an example. Where did we get the words; empty, paper, bag and number 3? Those are just dualistic words and numbers. So, what is the exact absolute non-conceptual description of that "empty paper bag 3" thing? Go there and then tell me what it absolutely is. Well, that journey will not happen, so what do we then have? But, but this non-conceptual so-called place would be a no-thing-ness kinda no place?

Roger, good questions. I'm not adept enough in mathematics to answer them, so I'll simply share some more quotes from the Ian Stewart article:
...a basic idea needed sorting out that no one really understood [in the late 1800s]. Numbers.

Sure, everyone knew how to do sums. Using numbers wasn't the problem. The big question was what they were. You can show someone two sheep, two albatrosses, two galaxies. But can you show them two?

The symbol "2"? That's a notation, not the number itself. Many cultures use a different symbol. The word "two"? No, for the same reason... For thousands of years humans had been using numbers to great effect; suddenly a few deep thinkers realised no one had a clue to what they were.

...The way to define them, he [Frege] believed, was through the deceptively simple process of counting.

What do we count? A collection of things -- a set. How do we count it? By matching the number of things in the set with a standard set of known size. The next step was simple but devastating: throw away the numbers.

You could use the [seven] dwarfs to count the days of the week. Just set up the correspondence: Monday (Doc), Tuesday (Grumpy)...Sunday (Dopey). There are Dopey days in the week. It's a perfectly reasonable alternative number system.

...The number of days equals the number of dwarfs, not because both are seven, but because you can match days to dwarfs.

What, then, is a number? Mathematical logicians realised that to define the number 2, you need to construct a standard set which intuitively has two members. To define 3, use a standard set with three numbers [or members?; could be typo]. ...This was where the empty set came in and solved the whole thing by itself.

Let me remind everyone once again:

Of course we will never know the answer but things can become crystal clear in such a way that there is no question, if we understand the primary illusion which is...

objectifying what is functioning (while objectifying) and calling it 'me'.

Therefore, the freedom (answer) you look for is where you look from. And what would that be?

Now you know (don't know).

This blog entry suffers from philosohpic naivetee. In fact, this is due because it relies on the works of scientisits and mathmaticians who happen to be the worst of philosophers in our unfortunate times.
Nothing is nothing, period. So saying nothing is comprised of the quantum energy of space-time, super symmetric, quantum loop, non-dual gravity or whatever is just silly attempts at intimidating people.
Simple philosophical truth. Any statement saying nothing is formed of ... is wrong.
In addition, i didn't understand what al this fancy talk about set theory has to do with nothing. Who ever said that nothingness is equivalent to zero or to the empty set? It seems you're comparing oranges to apples only because they'reboth spherical in shape.
One final advice, if you accept it. Never take philosophy from scientists. They're really, ... Well, naive.

I'm guessing my follow up got lost.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)


  • Welcome to the Church of the Churchless. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.
  • HinesSight
    Visit my other weblog, HinesSight, for a broader view of what's happening in the world of your Church unpastor, his wife, and dog.
  • BrianHines.com
    Take a look at my web site, which contains information about a subject of great interest to me: me.
  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
  • I Hate Church of the Churchless
    Can't stand this blog? Believe the guy behind it is an idiot? Rant away on our anti-site.