Bob Ross

My issue would be that “not X” is a bounded infinite and so is “without numbers”: they both must conceive of the concept in toto to negate it. Therefo...

If I am understanding you correctly, then I would say that there is no “neighbor” to PoR. I think, and correct me if I am wrong, you are essentially a...

Hello Philosophim, Wonderful points as usual! Let me try to respond adequately. By “negation”, to be more precise, I mean a “complete negation”; that ...

In isolation, I agree that your quote of mine makes little sense; however, in the context of the entirety of the response where it is contained I thin...

I would like to clarify that the essay pertains to the higher principles involved in the example given therein, as opposed to a critique of the deriva...

Upon further contemplation, I agree with you that ‘he’, as an indexical use of language, is not analogous to my use of different senses. However, what...

I apologize for the belated response ucarr! I had a hefty week or so. With that being said, let me dive into your post. Thank you for the clarificatio...

I think that the two biggest cruces are (1) whether the individual at hand can transcend their own context (which is what you and Philosophim brought ...

I would say not quite. “existence” is indexical: is it awkward that I can refer to different people with the same word ‘he’? I personally don’t think ...

I am glad I finally was able to understand and address your contentions properly! The next essay will pertain to the investigation of the obligation t...

The reason that the consideration of what exists and what is known (or lack thereof) is outside the scope of the essay is because to conclude anything...

@"MAYAEL" & @"Cuthbert", I would also like to clarify that, despite ontology and epistemology being considered out of bounds of the essay, I don't wan...

Within the essay, it is proven to be true. I am arguing for its proof as utilized as an unbounded infinite, which quite literally means that someone c...

I wasn’t claiming the cup does or does not exist in an ontic sense but, rather, the meaningful distinction I find between different usages of the term...

Although I may be misunderstanding, I am slowly extrapolating that you may be refraining from voicing your full concerns (pertaining to the essay) bec...

I can see how your contention is similar to Mayael’s; however, I have not understood, as of yet, Mayael to be making your contention (but I could be w...

By “tool” I am understanding you to mean “a means to an end”. Correct me if I am wrong, but, for the intents of my response here, I will be assuming t...

If by "complicated" you merely mean that it is more complex than the provided illustration, then I agree. Bob

If I am understanding you correctly, then, as a simplification, yes. With respect to the image you linked, the all encompassing circle would be the su...

To be honest, I think this is an entirely separate question from the essay, as you are questioning the entirety of the branch of metaphysics: which is...

Although that is fine if you would like to use that kind of distinction, I would like to note that that is not what a “bounded infinite” is defined as...

Nice to meet you Agent Smith! I understand that many fields of study are still of yet formulating the behavior and kinds of infinite (e.g., mathematic...

I must concede that, at this time, I do not have readily available a short and simple explanation for the principle of regulation (that doesn’t erode ...

Oh I see: no worries my friend! There is an example in the essay which I think explains it well: did you find it to be confusing as well? Bob

Nice to meet you magritte! For clarification, are you saying that defining what ‘true’ I have thereby restricted myself to some set of realist binary ...

I think I understand. Basically (and correct me if I am wrong), an infinite within bounds actually simply approaches the limit as opposed to actually ...

You are correct and this is why the form, as opposed to mere content, of an infinite is incredibly important. Let’s take my Y example again: without Y...

I want to clarify that I think you are thinking of it conversely to what I was proposing. When you say: That proves that “unmarried man” is not a sine...

Sounds good my friend: hopefully I can provide a substantive and helpful response here. If I am understanding this title correctly, then I actually th...

I think I understand what you are asking (but correct me if I am wrong), and, unfortunately, I anticipate that my answer will not be satisfactory. You...

Oh, I see! I would love to have a conversation about infinities (e.g., set theory) if you are interested: my knowledge of it is by no means expert lev...

At the beginning of the endeavor of writing the essay, that is exactly what I was wondering as well. That’s why I kind of postulate it as a purpose ra...

Hello Philosophim! I am glad to see you again! So “without which, not” is meant as an unbounded infinite negative (i.e., if not A, then an unbounded i...

Not all my friend! I am just not entirely sure the relevance to the essay itself: are you contending that I ought to remove the unbounded vs bounded d...

Absolutely no worries my friend! I think we are mutually just as confused as each other with respect to conversation. Perhaps I can clarify the purpos...

Hello ucarr! I appreciate your analysis and response: let me try to respond adequately. I would say that it depends on how you are defining “first cau...

Nice to meet you Rocco! I apologize: I am having a hard time understanding this question. Could you please reformulate the question? What exactly are ...

I still don’t think I fully understand what you are meaning, but I think I have a better idea now: thank you for the elaboration! Let me try to clarif...

It depends entirely on what you are referring to as unbounded: content or form? For example, the set of all natural numbers is regarded as an actual i...

I think there is a big enough recognition of it, for the sake of the essay, to clearly and concisely define the terminology. However, I agree that mor...

I apologize my friend! I honestly could not tell, but I see now that it was most certainly in good faith! With that being said, let me address your qu...

Nice to meet you Cuthbert! I have observed many discussion boards on this forum which do not exemplify what I am envisioning as a productive conversat...

Although I understand the point pertaining to the dispute amongst mathematicians over "potential" vs "actual" infinities, I am not sure how that objec...

Nice to meet you my friend! To be completely honest, I am not sure if your post was out of good faith or simply trolling. If the former, then I look f...

Absolutely no problem! Take as much time as you want: I would imagine we both prefer substantive responses that take some time over swift, insubstanti...

@"Philosophim", First and foremost I want to thank you for a wonderful discussion (as always)! I appreciate you taking the time to respond the points ...

Hello @"Philosophim", As always, take your time: no worries! I have no problem waiting for substantive, well-thought out replies (: That is absolutely...

I don't think this really contended with anything I wrote. The main point was that the reason "self-consciousness" didn't exist back then for the gree...

This is true of every metaphysics that even hints at any kind of "subject" / "object" divide. This has no specific reference to Christianity and scien...

Subjectivity is that which, generally speaking, pertains to the 1st person experience of an individual. I think science actually denies any such truth...