Constancy lies in knowing
the source. The river runs on
beneath its bed.
First of all to define the term absolute and principle in their simplest form, as being “always true” provides us with a way to reason about them. Archimedes principle of leverage is not a property we can own, but universally it is a true principle that we now “use” in common, in so many diverse ways.
Such is the principle of language that dominate the people’s of this planet, and how our conscious minds use it. Implicit within most language systems we have embedded “opposites” for each primary term e,g ‘good – bad, and we justify them accordingly. Dichotomies then become a limitation cause. Heraclitus’s solution was to “unite the opposites” thus escalating them to a new dimension.
When we physically remove dichotomies we are left with principal terms, or absolutes, which in philosophical history speak of in an individual state as constants, and belie human experience as becoming.
Heraclitus’s “unity of opposites” seemed the most promising. My understanding of that now made dichotomies a semantic illusion. If achieved mindfully it is the act of uniting them, providing a consciousness correct experience of ‘what is’. Paradoxically, in an individual state, the positive principal of any dichotomy is a fixed constant, but when conjoined with each other they are now energised to provide new meaning. Semantics and their implicit meaning then progresses exponentially – using copula’s, or conjunctions. With that the Absolute vs Relativity debate is irrelevant.
Below is a way out of the confusion that arises.
Life’s beginning. From that moment life is dependent for its growth cycle in its mothers womb, and the processes that must take place to ensure that life survives.
At birth that cycle changes, and external processes take over, and the child experiences a whole new world in which it is totally dependent. It requires air, food, water, space, relationships, and language. A whole gambit of functional necessities must be delivered.
At no stage can any life be removed from that initial dependency, we are always dependent. In maturing, we grow into processes of being interdependent, and can take some responsibility for our actions, but that does not translate into the myth of being independent. We never can be independent – like it or not.
Oxford Dictionary. A peculiar definition of independent: “not dependent on others for validity”
If that speaks to identification, or for what they say, it is of no matter, because we cannot escape from being dependent on everything that is.
All forms of life depend on contributing necessities whatever they may be.
Our best information is to recognise for ourselves, that the words we use can have powerful consequences.
There are no dichotomies!
See p18-19 “category mistakes” The Concept of Mind. Gilbert Ryle.
Explanation: Dichotomies only exist as categories to their Home site.Every dichotomy to health can only exist because Health is their Home site. All forms of life on this planet have a certain degree of health with its various categories. If you have health at any level then you are alive. Without them you are dead.
Bodhidharma searched for his Past
Then came Home.
Footnote: To refresh the original purpose of my earlier blogs. These shorter inserts offer the reason I started to search for any data, ancient or otherwise on human consciousness, specifically related to Alzheimer’s.
At 89 years of age (well past my used by date) it may well be that I am a candidate with a focus on my own pending dementia. If so, then the theory and the method I write about is holding it at bay. To address the health of my mind in this way could be the catalyst that retains its own functional activity.
A semantic template can be created using data on both domain pages. No definition of absolutes or principles can be ill-defined.
The are always interconnected and interdependent.
Each configuration constructed by anyone has meaning particular to them, although its value is universal. That is why it is never personal property!
Share posts with a foreign friend in their language.
Always clear cookies for easy control of your PC.
what at times troubles me is your “semantic template” that includes terms/signs such as “universal”… who’s universe (or what’s?). Or what universe? Or how? I think I like this idea of a “semantic template” as de-term-ining our own “take (in-take, out-take)” re: “world,” but hesitate to think we’re “on” or “in” to anything more than a reflexive accounting of our own experience-in/with? What do you think?
We are eclipsed by dichotomies in language. See Heraclitus.
Creating your own template without dichotomies is your own path to your own questions.
The principles have their own double helix effect as you define them. They are interconnected, and interdependent.
My apologies. Will be writing to you shortly.
My apologies for the late contact.
Spent the last three months in and out of hospital.
Your interest in The Semantic Template is the property of anyone who is interested. It’s properties are
speccific to your understanding, and you alone – if any! Whatever value obtained is part of our consciousness,
always interconnected, and interdependent.
The purpose of life is to destroy that which does’nt exist – Self!
The Semantic Template offers a new dimension – Us!
Thank you for your time.
LikeLiked by 1 person