[dleviwing]

Guille;
If you want the last word----it's yours.
I'm not a buff of this kind of philosophy.

[Guille]

I don't need the last word. If I wanted it, I wouldn't have even started the thread. I just want a clear definition for myself, at least. But probably I won't find it so soon. I will think on this theme during my month (July) in Oxford.

[dleviwing]

Guille;
As you can see by the number of levels to this thread, philosophy is a never ending debate, regardless of the topic.

Are you that good to go through Oxford in just a month??? LOL J

[Guille]

To the first part of your post: true. This is something we were commenting in "social education class" (I call it philosophy class; because what we talk, all is philosophic subjects). We were doing philosophy about philosophy. And all agreed that philosophy is never ending. But this is not exact. It is required to detail it, and we did it like this: Philosophy discussion is never ending between people. This is because one can end up concluding discussions to himself about philosophy. Also I think, that there are many things in philosophy many people may agree (for example, that destiny depends on both: chance and choice, the proportions of each varying in specific situations).

About the second part of the post: yes. I am good enough to go through what many other great and genius men did during some years, in one month and with 14 years*.

*=note: The latest posts in the chat, is where I explain about my REAL age.

[Guille]

I realized that knowledge is, and can only be, a property of itself or/and a property of the properties of itself.

But this only works with "absolute knowledge".

[AntonioLao]

Knowledge is like the horizon, you can see it but the nearer you get to it, the farther it become.

[Guille]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao

Knowledge is like the horizon, you can see it but the nearer you get to it, the farther it become.

That is exactly what I think. It's like perfection.
I like to visualize this by imagining the sun being knowledge, and I can see the sun, and I imagine that if I reach to see the sun how it actually is, I have the sun (the knowledge). But it is impossible to see the sun (from the earth) exactly how it is, because we observe it by its light emissions, and the light takes 8.3 seconds to come here, so we can never achieve looking at the sun how it is (from the earth).

[AntonioLao]

But the curvature of space-time can never let us know for sure the exact location of the sun. And eventuality, when the sun becomes a black hole, all we can know about its existence is by way of the event horizon. And whatever falls into the horizon has no way of coming back - out, which includes all information carried by photons, the fastest messengers of the universe until we can use the superluminal gravitons.

[Guille]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao

But the curvature of space-time can never let us know for sure the exact location of the sun. And eventuality, when the sun becomes a black hole, all we can know about its existence is by way of the event horizon. And whatever falls into the horizon has no way of coming back - out, which includes all information carried by photons, the fastest messengers of the universe until we can use the superluminal gravitons.

Applied to my representation, this would mean that when the humans get the knowledge, that there is much more knowledge than what we believe now, then if we get near enough, we will be automatically pulled to the complete knowledge. Well, this is a good theory of knowledge.

[AntonioLao]

Only lack of knowledge can pull like a BH, but knowledge is like expansion of repulsive gravity.

Black is no knowledge and light is full of knowledge.