@CosminVisan I’ve just read part one of your paper I can now see more clearly how a scripture-less, secular, scientific, and philosophical, view of the world has repeatedly led to a polytheistic world view of several ‘I am’.
Poet-philosopher Muhammad Iqbal has written extensively on ‘Khudi’. You should be able to find several translations of his work, and treatises about it, online. I believe in the scriptures, as the revealed truth, and so my understanding of reality is based upon, and inspired by them, especially The Arabic Quran. You might find my studies of some interest: https://signsandscience.blogspot.com/ Samiya Illias > On 26-Jun-2024, at 12:25 AM, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List > <everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > > > @Terren. That's why is crucial to fully read the papers. By reading the > papers, you will come across paragraphs like this: > > "Correctly, self-reference cannot be spoken of. > But even saying “self-reference cannot be spoken of” is an utterance about > it, so not even such a > sentence can be uttered. Even naming it is faulty. Not even saying > “self-reference” is correct. Is a > very peculiar states of affairs. On the one hand, we cannot speak about it, > on the other hand, this > “entity” (wrong again, because not being spokeable-about, we cannot call it > “entity” either) is > responsible for bringing consciousness into existence. Some might wonder, if > we cannot speak > about it, why are we sure that it is the one that brings consciousness into > existence. The reason > we can do this is because we observe the phenomenology of qualia (like > inclusion and > transcendence of levels) and conclude that this is possible only if some > entity that we call “self-reference” > must “exist”." > > I understand that we live in an age where attention span has been reduced to > 5 seconds. Nothing wrong with that. But if that is your attention span, then > you should employ it for tik-tok videos. Other subjects require a different > attention span. > >> On Tuesday 25 June 2024 at 21:32:24 UTC+3 Terren Suydam wrote: >> From your paper, you define self-reference as: "Let self-reference be the >> entity with the property of looking-back-at-itself." >> >> Your definition invokes the concepts entity, property, looking-back, and >> itself. That's a lot of complexity for something that is fundamental. It's >> easy for me to imagine entities with different properties (i.e. that don't >> look-back-on-itself), but only because I'm starting from a linguistic >> perspective that already defines entities and properties, and >> looking-back-at-itself. You don't have that luxury. If you want to derive >> everything from a monism, you cannot define that monism in terms of concepts >> imported from a different metaphysics or conceptual framework. Entities and >> properties of looking-back-at-itself must be defined relative to your >> fundamental monism. >> >>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 2:04 PM 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List >>> <everyth...@googlegroups.com> wrote: >>> @Terren. There is no "self" and "ability to reference". There is just >>> self-reference. You can call it hampty-dampty if you want. >>> >>>> On Tuesday 25 June 2024 at 20:01:24 UTC+3 Terren Suydam wrote: >>>> I read enough to confirm that you postulate self-reference as fundamental >>>> - the entity upon which everything else can be built. I'm wondering how >>>> that can be fundamental if it requires two components (self, and the >>>> ability to reference). >>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 11:32 AM 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List >>>>> <everyth...@googlegroups.com> wrote: >>>>> The proper understanding happens by reading the paper, not by using >>>>> hallucinatory objects to give you a devoid of meaning shortcut. >>>>> >>>>>> On Tuesday 25 June 2024 at 16:42:11 UTC+3 Terren Suydam wrote: >>>>>> I used Claude Sonnet to summarize your paper. Tell me if any of this >>>>>> misses the mark, but the paper appears to posit self-reference as >>>>>> fundamental, upon which all other aspects of reality are derived. >>>>>> >>>>>> If so (this is me now), my first thought is that self-reference cannot >>>>>> be fundamental, because it already presupposes two distinct components: >>>>>> a "self" and the capacity to "reference". Worse, defining "self" >>>>>> (something to be derived) in terms of "self-reference" (fundamental) is >>>>>> circular. >>>>>> >>>>>> Terren >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 9:09 AM 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List >>>>>>> <everyth...@googlegroups.com> wrote: >>>>>>> I invite you to discover my paper "How Self-Reference Builds the World" >>>>>>> which is the theory of everything that people searched for millennia. >>>>>>> It can be found on my philpeople profile: >>>>>>> https://philpeople.org/profiles/cosmin-visan >>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups "Everything List" group. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>>>> an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/4f13128c-5b63-422f-a6cb-4c3eb4f3618cn%40googlegroups.com. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>>> "Everything List" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>>>> email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com. >>>> >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/ea01c75c-3cdd-4d9e-9ced-eb184ae03777n%40googlegroups.com. >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "Everything List" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>> email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com. >> >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/d91bb4ab-d34c-4508-9fa8-7278599ff78en%40googlegroups.com. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/72e3472c-faf4-4cc2-b12c-b661189f4b98n%40googlegroups.com. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/1714C96C-8AF2-4D3B-98F9-31A93E41C859%40gmail.com.
