Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredrick  It also does not mean that when both (or all) can agree that this is the ultimate platform that they must then agree on anything else — this platform does not require the parts to be in alignment; it is only in the abstract that they do have certain specific oppositional positions. |
Fredrick, it is not only in the abstract, that specific oppositional positions exist. Yes, tis true most oppositions are abstract, in spirit nature, but the real scientific universe exists,
absolutely in opposition, to all abstract illusions and abstract facts and positions...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Fredrick On this ultimate platform, different conflicting scientific sides (I am not talking about ontological deliveries here) can all be considered scientific under the strictest conditions. Science itself (yes, this is a singular noun but ultimately this word is an abstract) has such a platform; philosophy also has such a platform, religion has such a platform. |
Tis true all three have and use abstract positions, to explain much of what is the truth of each, but only science___The universe's self-contained absolute science of its fundamental substance and motion existence, is in and of itself, separate of abstract theorizing___The universe is absolutely real, in and of itself. Only man is the abstractor, not the universe, even though the universe of teleological evolution, produces this ontological abstractor, the universe remains absolutely real, as it eternally has... Herein lies the problem___Man's self-adding the abstract, to what is absolute...
Science is theorized with the abstract___yet, the pure gas-chemical-geo universe, pre-bio-era, is absolute science___Never abstract, at any motion or substance levels. It's absolutely real, as we are physically and spiritually real, but we become un-real, when we use the abstract to exaggerate the bio-era's true capabilities of limited spirit-egos... The spirit-ego is limited to c, in the bio-era, as a physical spirit-body operative, yet has the capacity of abstract imagination, to use scientifically logical, or non-scientifically logically, or illogically___Choice... We are all free to choose our intelligences, whether logical/illogical spiritual intelligence, or logical/illogical sceintific intelligence, or non-intelligences... That doesn't make them unitable. It doesn't make them un-unitable. It's just the teleological/ontological problem, that must be solved. IMO, it can only be solved by the physical science of spirit subordinated to universal teleological evolution, producing the later ontological being, and not ontological being producing the teleological universe... This is the old one and the many problem, between which came first, the chicken or the egg...
Regards,
Lloyd