On Sep 15, 2:44Â am, John J wrote:
> Art wrote:
>> On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 14:19:12 +0000, ZerkonX
X.net> wrote:>
>>> On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 22:48:20 -0700, A Situation wrote:
>>> recent as mathematics.
>
> First, I find ZerkonX's comments to be profound and I am led in a
> similar direction and would deviate to suggest 'nothing', even the
> fascination with the big bang, and the concept of the creation of time
> is manifest in a neurological structure of the human mind.
The mind consists of energy,time and space, so can only relate to such
frames of reference.To grasp this, one has to contemplate that we are
not our minds
>
> But to move on...
>
>> I disagree. I thnk the concept of "nothing" precedes the concept of
>> number(s). Numbers were invented to count things. If there are no
>> apples on the table, there are zero apples on the table. But "no
>> apples" is a earlier or more primitive concept than "zero apples".
>
> Am I correct with: IOW, there was no quantification of 'nothing' but the
> concept existed, possibly in terms of hunger (no food), or sex (no
> mate), or knowledge (nothing greater-than to help).
This is so simple, it 'boggles' the mind. Each individual, to discover
self, goes through a proces of elimination, by projection. This is
what Pythagoras was trying to communicate in his 'time'.
We are each multi fasceted, and we see first create what we see, befor
we see what we create. We each 'project' number, because of the need
for delusional representation.
> That resonates with what I think I know of the invention of a counting
> system (or accounting system). It took humankind a long time to accept
> that a symbolic representation of plurality had value.
Value in the construction of the necessary 'illusion'.
> For example, when
> they used a number of tokens in a 1:1 representations of a collection of
> trade-ware such as livestock. Then they found the utility of placing the
> tokens in a clay pot. But the pot or the contents were not value.
> Eventually a mark would be made on a pot to denote the extent of the
> collection inside, and finally the mark would replace the contents of
> the pot, then the pot itself. Value was thereby invented and counting
> developed further.
>
> It would be impossible for many to imagine that simple counting is still
> a questionable way to approach certain problems. We are still confounded
> by the concept of nothingness!
Particularly when an apple hits you on the head:-).
Self realization goes beyond concepts, which, like beliefs actually
are 'group' projections.
>
>> [...] We are souls as independent of matter, space and
>> time as the Creator is.
>
> I wonder and wonder when humankind first came to think that.
This is where it becomes 'boggling'. "We" think ; "I" know, is the
key .But to know consciously, we each have to know what we are not
first.
This is behind the myth of the fallen angel.
BOfL
- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
