/philosophy/ - Philosophy

a little bit

Depends, what do you mean by infinite?

>>4426

Time for speculation!

Define 'existence'.

Space and Time in this world may well be finite in both extent and scale.

Existence is self-transcendental, at least as far as any finite existence can understand. That's not exactly the same as being infinite, as infinity has to do with numbers.

>>4426

>Philosophy thread

>Doesn't clearly define words or intent, welcoming only vagueness to the thread

Great thread, OP is definitely going places with this kind of effort.

>>5353

OP is 9 months old. Only thing you can do is respond to the post attempting to resurrect thread. Wait he saged. You're just shitposting in your attempts to bump aren't you

>>5351

>infinity has to do with numbers

No, no it doesn't.

>self-transcendental

Well it doesn't seem like you are referring to any established concepts, why don't you provide your interpretation?

Yes, infinity really is about numbers.

X + apples(as apples) = 4 is not solvable. It's simply a syntax error, not even a real expression. Put infinity in an equation instead and it's valid. They like to say infinity is not a number, but it's like a number in every way that matters. infinity = lim x->0 1/x.

If it can't be expressed as numbers, then it isn't the usual infinity we talk about.

I define existence as and via interaction. Something that interacts exists. How it interacts defines how it exists. If it doesn't interact, you can't tell whether it exists or not...which means it existing is equivalent to it not existing, which means it doesn't exist.

Existence is self-justifying, which means self-transcendent. Justifying frameworks must exist prior to justifying anything. They are subordinate to existence. Turn this around, and you can see that there must be a self-justifying, self-transcendent principle, which we might as well call existence.

E.g. Causal systems are a subtype of justification framework. Causation must exist before it can cause anything. "It exists/happened because it was caused by events Q and Z."

Infinity is a thing which can exist or can not exist. Existence transcends infinity.

To me, OP reads as 'the physical universe must be infinite' which is dumb with a side of dumb.

>>5379

>Put infinity in an equation instead and it's valid

but that's wrong you fucking retard

infinity is just like apples. take a calculus class some time. infinity is only valid when applied from limits. and limits is not ordinary math

applying limit to apple as time approaches infinity, you will get rotten apples decay and death with a possibility for giving birth to more trees

sounds like an infinite series

anyways. I didn't read your post after that. don't want to be infected by stupid

>>5379

>Something that interacts exists

no. all things that exist maybe have interaction with something, but all things that interact doesn't mean they exist. unless you like to think that illusions exist

anything that interacts, means it's not self-justifying. lmfao do you even hear what you say

>it existing is equivalent to it not existing, which means it doesn't exist

wrong. you're trying to say there is a fallacy. oh look, an example of an illusion that interacts but doesn't exist

but it's not a fallacy. it's merely a paradox.

infinity transcends existence more like. there are an infinite attributes for infinity, and transcendence is one of them

>>5384

>take a calculus class some time

I have a degree in physics, genius.

I guess my professors just let me get away with not knowing the math...? I'm just that awesome, they couldn't bear to see me fail.

>applying limit to apple as time approaches infinity,

Actual apples are mathematical objects. They are not apples (as apples). As soon as it starts to rot, it's not as an apple anymore.

Sorry, I'll recalibrate for your retardation in future. I forgot not everyone can think clearly.

>unless you like to think that illusions exist

Of course illusions exist. A: something existed for you to perceive. B: the illusion exists as a thought in the mind. That's what an illusion is.

Your mind is cucked.

You have illusions about illusions, kek.

>infinity transcends existence more like. there are an infinite attributes for infinity, and transcendence is one of them

I experience that thing where contrary information actually bolsters my belief.

Well, information-intended-to-be-contrary. "Infinity transcends existence => infinity doesn't exist." Cool, let's discuss alien unicorns now. (You did a bad.)

Recalibration time.

Your illusion cuckery is something I'd do to someone whose mind I felt like crippling. It makes you stop acknowledging consciousness as its own thing. The illusion, existing only in the mind (you've heard that phrase before, surely) is said to not exist. This implies the mind doesn't exist. And now I've got you thinking your mind, the source of all thoughts, impulses, and instincts contrary to my will, doesn't exist and only fools believe in it. You take one of the most significant tools a human has and simply discard it. My mind gets to move into the power vacuum.

Someone who can think clearly only has to be handed the possibility that illusions are real in some sense, and they can work all this out (as a possibility) on their own. And then they'll realize it's true. But then if they could think clearly, the idea that illusions aren't real wouldn't have been able to take hold in their mind in the first place, being as it makes no sense.

You can see the consequences clearly in being unable to recognize existence for what it is. You think this is limited to purely academic topics? It wouldn't be such popular propaganda if that were so. Lots of things stop making sense...meaning, to maintain this illusion about illusions, you need to be handed how it's supposed to work by authorities. It won't make sense, but it will work, allowing the authorities to steal your trust in yourself and arrogate it to themselves.

>>5387

>>5386

Look at this legendary battle of the sagers. You don't even know what aspect OP meant to apply infinite to, but you still managed to create a math debate out of it.