Vexen Crabtree 2015


Vexen Crabtree's Live Journal

Sociology, Theology, Anti-Religion and Exploration: Forcing Humanity Forwards

  • 1

what about universial and mathematical opposites?

OK, you proved that most opposites are illusions. What about light and darkness, order and chaos, known and unknown? There are theories that before the universe was created there was pure darkness, then in some form or fashion there was light which became life. within nature, there seems to be a natural order to how things worked, but since there is things that are unknown, then chaos came into play. We bring order into chaos by solving a problem (canceling the unknown with a known fact) all these opposites have to reflect into nature of life at some points, or we wouldn't exist.
The problem with the concept of heaven is that there is no chaos in heaven, so it couldn't exist by the universal law of opposites. if you read the torah where a story of creation is. It the fact that god(light) gave us existence as a punishment for defying its request from eating from the tree of knowledge (opposite action that possibly caused human realization [darkness]).
If you read "7 Habits of Highly Effective People" by Stephen Covey, you will see a philosophy about being principled centered, which means you look within yourself for values, then reflect them back to the outside based on correct principles nature laid out for us. If you go against these correct principles then you only hurt your self not them. also, It talks about how people are usually effected by the outside-in that people blame the outside world for their problems. When, it is really ourself that has the problem. We can't control other people, but we can change the way we see things. Then, it goes into how we can make choices to work with other people to achieve greater effectiveness overall (interdependence). the 7 habits show a reality with the opposites of inside-out and outside-in philosophies.
Finally, Mathematics have opposites based on order and chaos. We call them known and unknown. If you have a unknown to solve a problem you perform the opposite operation to get the answer. In math there are some opposites we haven't found yet are wont calculate, but math proves there is a opposite in any problem.
For example take a N scale(unknown) the number could be anything, when we set a value we have solved the problem because we did an opposite operation. Some opposites are not what people think are opposites like for example what is the opposite of 0? if you guessed infinity you are right, but here is the shocker. In a way, they are parallel(paradoxic)
So, Here is the paradox of the day. In a way there can't be opposites, but in order for anything to exist there is an opposite of that object ,idea ,or operation that exists. continued existence depends on the mathematical function of the balance of 0 and infinity (hybrid). If you think about it infinity equals 0 because existence is based on opposites canceling out which equals 0. if you believed religion then one day the universe would be 0 equals 0 to create a perfect order on both sides.
Why am I HybridMaster? Because, I use a combination of opposing philosophies and ideals in my daily life (paradoxical most of the time), and somehow I remain sane. The combination of heterogeneous(different[could be opposite]) ideals and objects is a Hybrid. To prove opposites wrong you first have to prove against the concept of hybrids.

Re: what about universial and mathematical opposites?

The previous poster, HybridMaster has raised several vital points. However the vitality of the anti-opposite theory is that it eliminates a rather common everyday proof against solipsism: that external reality is painfully obvious simply because there are so many seemingly direct oppsites in life, the universe, and everything. Another normal way to refute a solipsism is through maintaining that our lives are hybrids of subject/object or we can espouse some pluralist philosophy of any kind.
Fortunately for would be solipsists, there is a definate healthy argument against hybrid theories. Hybridizing anything can be said to weaken its effectiveness in its orignal state or purpose. The chief explication of this idea is found in Plato's Republic: a docter makes a poor soldier, and a potter is not the best shepard. Yes, there are people who wear many hats rather well, Rennaisance men I assume. There are reasons to contradict such lifestyles though, one is that in a limited space, we can at best hope to do one thing well instead of many things poorly. The second reason is that hybrid theories are hard to sell. If I questioned the method of combining philosophies, we find lots of compromises and contradictions perhaps? If so then I become disenchanted by this new dream, this philosophical Eden where all philosophies can co-exist simultaneously.

True opposites.

The true opposite of a word is the lack of whatever the word means. Spritually, scientifically, theologically- doesn't really matter. Everything has two core opposites. One true, and the other I call the shadow opposite. The shadow opposite is merely a contrast to the word. Light-dark, up-down. What is usually obvious. I most cases, when an object (for instance) is combined with it's shadow opposite, the result is the true opposite of both. The lack of either. (In it's original form, I am aware of destruction's residual biproducts). But relatively rarely, the combinations of opposites creates something entirely new, with no corresponding shadow opposite to either of it's "parents". All interpretations are derivatives of the shadow opposite, and therfore, semantically infinite. In a sense, having a shadow opposite is the core of all debate. Ahringhatti, by the way. Somewhere I could yell yahoo and no one could hear me.

Search engine

Hello. What better or ?

  • 1

Log in