設萬維讀者為首頁 萬維讀者網 -- 全球華人的精神家園 廣告服務 聯繫我們 關於萬維
 
首  頁 新  聞 視  頻 博  客 論  壇 分類廣告 購  物
搜索>> 發表日誌 控制面板 個人相冊 給我留言
幫助 退出
 
中國現代哲學家學會  
發現自己的絕對力量,它會震驚世界  
我的名片
中國現代哲學家學會
註冊日期: 2015-01-10
訪問總量: 1,676,390 次
點擊查看我的個人資料
Calendar
我的公告欄
最新發布
· AA, Thinking and PI
· Consciousness to Thinking as A
· 為什麼成人學習語言更高效
· 從 Krashen–Terrell 的“自然教
· 《標準英語》宣言
· Daoism and AA: What Is the Dif
· Why Humans Cannot Create Whole
友好鏈接
· hare:hare的博客
· bunny2:bunny2的博客
· InstanceTV:InstanceTV的博客
· Rabbit:Stinger 的博客
· microsoftbug:microsoftbug的博
分類目錄
【Mingcheng】
【心言】
· Free book: The Ontology of Nat
· 同學會會長關於哲學研究的對話(2
· 同學會會長關於哲學研究的對話
· 天下大勢
· 愛者共天地
· 死亡萬歲 -- 清明節留下的一縷思
· 重發: 哲學之愛從何而來?
· [中哲會]新程序啟動說明
· 哲學之愛從何而來?
【電視直播】
· USA-China in Depth (1)
· 《中哲會》TV直播頻道
【政治】
· 毛澤東的“民族解放”神話:專制
· 為什麼中國人反駁西方理論的觀點
· 台灣立足基礎-造原子彈
· 中國人缺乏理性會有什麼後果?
· 您願意選誰作為第一屆“網絡中華
· 中國未來的社會結構(2)
· 我建議在萬維上進行一次中國未來
· 川普現在唯一的願望是當個“前總
· 範例黨黨員章程
· 談中國民運的戰略與策略(範例黨
【傳統文化】
· 國學與西方思想的區別是狗尾與貂
· 必須立刻彈劾川普!
· 沒文化的鬼子
· 新年伊始中國“十馬奔騰”
· 扯住教皇不放—今天世界哪個國家
· 為什麼中國讀書人很難擺脫中國文
· 中國人的“感性邏輯”
· 也談“中國知識分子墮落”
· "現在打中國,輸贏無懸念&q
· 說!“你脫,還是不脫?!”
【深山蘭】
· 從二例看中國古代的思維方式
【其它】
· 語言與國家:俞興文明進步論的學
· 胡杰紀錄片:無人區畫展
· 美國為什麼偉大?- 只因為一個充
· 六四用一句話說
· 華人應該如何與西方人交往?(1)
· 中國人”也”是同歐洲人一樣的理
· 萬維有太多哲學誤導!
· 一月二十號白宮會發生哪一幕?
· 中國問題:文字
· 用事實駁斥中共關於朝鮮戰爭的謊
【比較政策】
· 階級分化的復甦
【一般】
· 中國為什麼不適合搞民主?
· 伯克利新名言:贏了-就是不認輸
· 什麼是今日美國社會的根本問題?
· 美國人打輸了還是朋友,中國人..
· 川普—你為什麼如此愚蠢?!
· 壓垮川普的最後一根稻草-喬治亞
· 看來川普...
· 中國對中國人的影響
· 中國文化在哪些方面體現了幼稚?
· 對中國人“批判”的看法 - 兼答
【遠方】
· 介紹一下荒誕論:遠方的孤獨
【何岸泉】
· 辯證法與放屁(ZT)
【哲學資料】
· 為相對主義辯護
· Instancology for Philosophers-
· Ten American Philosophers
· (1)馬克思和恩格思的“唯物主義
· Phenomenology of Spirit, Chapt
· 德國政府決定:在全球範圍對使用
· 為什麼人需要哲學?
· ZT:Rights
· Is your pet psychic?
· Twin Telepathy: Is there a ‘S
【中軍】
· 關於精神的問題
· 思維創新的哲學理解(下)
· 思維創新的哲學理解(上)
· 人生究竟是什麼
· 悟性創新的本性及閃失
· 悟性的創新及孩子的例證
· 怎樣進行討論
· 文字、語音、語義與創新
· 哲學研究能幹點兒啥
· 中國缺少創新的各種看法
【徒子】
· AA, Thinking and PI
· Consciousness to Thinking as A
· 為什麼成人學習語言更高效
· 從 Krashen–Terrell 的“自然教
· 《標準英語》宣言
· Daoism and AA: What Is the Dif
· Why Humans Cannot Create Whole
· Why AA Is Not a Tautology Like
· 思維與語言是絕對與相對(符號)
· 中國人學不好英語的原因:一個哲
【嘎子】
· 關於丘成桐的講話的評論
· 已經轉到嘎子博客
· <二> 原本打算單獨寫一篇
· 哲學同真理的關係以及辯證法的本
【几子】
· What Will Happen to President
· 隨想:可口可樂
· 分形與卦像:漫話混沌,科學,與
· 淺議科學實證主義
存檔目錄
03/01/2026 - 03/31/2026
02/01/2026 - 02/28/2026
01/01/2026 - 01/31/2026
12/01/2025 - 12/31/2025
11/01/2025 - 11/30/2025
10/01/2025 - 10/31/2025
09/01/2025 - 09/30/2025
08/01/2025 - 08/31/2025
07/01/2025 - 07/31/2025
06/01/2025 - 06/30/2025
05/01/2025 - 05/31/2025
04/01/2025 - 04/30/2025
03/01/2025 - 03/31/2025
02/01/2025 - 02/28/2025
01/01/2025 - 01/31/2025
11/01/2024 - 11/30/2024
08/01/2024 - 08/31/2024
07/01/2024 - 07/31/2024
05/01/2024 - 05/31/2024
03/01/2024 - 03/31/2024
02/01/2024 - 02/29/2024
01/01/2024 - 01/31/2024
12/01/2023 - 12/31/2023
11/01/2023 - 11/30/2023
10/01/2023 - 10/31/2023
09/01/2023 - 09/30/2023
08/01/2023 - 08/31/2023
07/01/2023 - 07/31/2023
06/01/2023 - 06/30/2023
02/01/2023 - 02/28/2023
01/01/2023 - 01/31/2023
12/01/2022 - 12/31/2022
11/01/2022 - 11/30/2022
09/01/2022 - 09/30/2022
08/01/2022 - 08/31/2022
07/01/2022 - 07/31/2022
06/01/2022 - 06/30/2022
05/01/2022 - 05/31/2022
07/01/2021 - 07/31/2021
05/01/2021 - 05/31/2021
03/01/2021 - 03/31/2021
02/01/2021 - 02/28/2021
01/01/2021 - 01/31/2021
12/01/2020 - 12/31/2020
11/01/2020 - 11/30/2020
10/01/2020 - 10/31/2020
09/01/2020 - 09/30/2020
08/01/2020 - 08/31/2020
07/01/2020 - 07/31/2020
06/01/2020 - 06/30/2020
05/01/2020 - 05/31/2020
04/01/2020 - 04/30/2020
03/01/2020 - 03/31/2020
02/01/2020 - 02/29/2020
01/01/2020 - 01/31/2020
12/01/2019 - 12/31/2019
11/01/2019 - 11/30/2019
10/01/2019 - 10/31/2019
09/01/2019 - 09/30/2019
08/01/2019 - 08/31/2019
07/01/2019 - 07/31/2019
06/01/2019 - 06/30/2019
05/01/2019 - 05/31/2019
04/01/2019 - 04/30/2019
01/01/2018 - 01/31/2018
04/01/2016 - 04/30/2016
07/01/2015 - 07/31/2015
06/01/2015 - 06/30/2015
05/01/2015 - 05/31/2015
04/01/2015 - 04/30/2015
03/01/2015 - 03/31/2015
02/01/2015 - 02/28/2015
01/01/2015 - 01/31/2015
發表評論
作者:
用戶名: 密碼: 您還不是博客/論壇用戶?現在就註冊!
     
評論:
Absolutology - Part Two of Instancology
   


Absolutology - Part Two of Instancology

The Absolute consisted of two parts, Relatively Absolute and Absolutely Absolute.

On Relative Absolute

"RA is the ground of irreducible absolutes within logic — logic, mathematics, laws, life, and meaning — the formless conditions that make all form and thought possible."

Definition I: Absolute is of logic infinity used as an adjective as in Absolute Relative(AR). This infinity ends up in human consciousness. Logic infinity to study the final form of logical development. For example, what is the perfect display form, DOS, Window, or cellular device or ….

Step 1: Recall the 2×2 Core

Relative (R) ↔ Absolute-related (A) Two layers: AR, RR ↔ RA, AA So RA sits in the A level, but within logic (unlike AA).

Step 2: Categorize the RA pillars

Think of RA as formless absolutes expressed through different modes of necessity. We can group them along two axes:

Formal vs. Factual

Formal: Logic, Mathematics

Factual: Laws, Life, Meaning

Structural vs. Existential

Structural: Logic, Mathematics, Laws

Existential: Life, Meaning

Step 3: Mapping into 2×2

Here’s one possible mapping: | Axis | Structural (Order/Rule) | Existential (Being/Sense) | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Formal (Pure forms) | Logic (rules of validity) <br> Mathematics (quantitative structures) | — (formal existential may be empty; existence is never purely formal) | | Factual (Given truths) | Laws (word-based necessities, e.g., entropy, constants) | Life (self-organizing dynamism) <br> Meaning (sense and value) |

Step 4: Interpretation

Logic + Mathematics → RA’s formal skeleton.

Laws → RA’s necessary factual givens, bridging form and reality.

Life + Meaning → RA’s existential absolutes, which cannot be reduced to form or fact but are presupposed in human being and experience.

So RA = five irreducibles organized as:

Formal-structural: Logic, Mathematics

Factual-structural: Laws

Factual-existential: Life, Meaning

Step 5: Why this matters

This mapping shows RA is not random: it is the necessary framework of the Absolute within logic. It gives:

The formal preconditions of thought (logic, mathematics).

The worded necessities that science discovers (laws).

The existential grounds that make thought and value possible (life, meaning).

Five elements in optical sense.

1. Meaning

Ontic status: Meaning seems the most dependent on interpretation. Without beings capable of intending or signifying, “meaning” as such is silent. Yet: One could argue that the world itself already “bears” a kind of proto-meaning in its structure — the fact that relations exist and can be interpreted shows that meaning is not purely human, but latent in reality. Conclusion: Without humans, manifest meaning vanishes, but ontic meaningfulness (the relational potential for significance) remains.

2. Life

Ontic status: Life does not depend on humans; it emerged long before humans and could exist without them. Conclusion: Life is ontically independent. It is not reducible to human interpretation, though our categories for describing it are.

3. Laws

Ontic status: Laws (e.g., gravity, thermodynamics) are indifferent to human existence. The universe operated under them long before conscious beings arose. Conclusion: Laws are fully ontic, existing regardless of interpreters.

4. Logic

Ontic status: More difficult. Logic is the structure of consistency itself — e.g., “A cannot be non-A at the same time in the same respect.” Even if no mind applied it, reality would still be structured in ways that either hold or do not hold together. Example: A star cannot both explode and not explode at the same moment. That is ontically true, independent of observers. Conclusion: Logic is ontic — not invented, but discovered.

5. Mathematics

Ontic status: Numbers and geometrical relations appear human-symbolic, but their truth holds regardless of us. The ratio of a circle’s circumference to its diameter was π before any human existed. Planetary orbits followed ellipses before Kepler. Conclusion: Mathematics is ontic, though its symbolic articulation is human.

Synthesis (Ontic Justification)

Fully ontic: Life, Laws, Logic, Mathematics — they are whether or not we are.

Conditionally ontic: Meaning — in its latent sense (as structured relationality) it persists, but in its manifest sense (as interpreted significance) it requires a mind.

So in short:

Without humans: Laws, logic, mathematics, and life would still be.

Meaning would exist only as potential, not as explicit significance.

Definition II: Absolute is of logic zero used as a noun as in relative Absolute(RA). It ends up with four formless entities: life, logic, laws and mathematics.

For example, a good kid started to become a criminal. A law-abiding husband decided to murder his wife and children at one point in his life. From nothing to something is the process from logic zero to logic one, two,….

On Absolutely Absolute

Definition III: Absolute is of being beyond logic, called Absolutely Absolute (AA). It’s a logic necessity in structure, but not a real entity. In fact, any description of AA is incorrect. We can only borrow words trying to express it temporarily.


 
關於本站 | 廣告服務 | 聯繫我們 | 招聘信息 | 網站導航 | 隱私保護
Copyright (C) 1998-2026. Creaders.NET. All Rights Reserved.