what does "non-discursive" mean on the wiki?

[Hecky2222]

People will misunderstand no matter how much or how little you explain to them.

A term Nova created to glaze his OC to H1A+

^^^^ hitting as true

 

[XuQingXiYi]

Then it’s just 1-A

what about

Everything in the world ends. Eternal life… is just something that comes along. The true goal of cultivation is to pursue the truth!" A glint appeared in Su Ming's eyes, and his footsteps became firmer. "To search for the truth, to search for an answer to a question. This… is the goal of the cultivators of my generation and why we practice cultivation. Getting stronger and having longevity are just affiliations in the path of pursuing the truth." "When we search for the truth, we also cultivate the truth!" "When we seek understanding, we also cultivate understanding. I, Su Ming, practiced cultivation because I wanted to understand what is happening around me. I wanted answers to my questions. It is just like what they say, Dao is the truth. Even though life is ephemeral… we can leave the world with a smile." As he gained his epiphany, Su Ming gradually gained an unfathomable presence. It was faint, and there was only a hint of it, but its appearance made it look like Su Ming was about to become transparent. It was as if at that moment, he surpassed Harmonious Morus Alba! "But even if I pursue the truth, even if I pursue understanding, it is only for an answer. But the phrase "to seek the answer" means that the path of cultivating Dao… is destined to be boundless." "You will never know where the end is… because the path of cultivation is only differentiated by how far different individuals can go. The end can never be seen." Su Ming smiled. He looked like he had just been freed from something. With his epiphany, he laughed, and his laughter gradually grew louder. "I live in Harmonious Morus Alba's wings, but in whose body does Harmonious Morus Alba live? Even that life hosting Harmonious Morus Alba will only live for a short moment. When it lifts its head, would it not see that it is living in another life that will only live for a short moment? And when that life hosting these two is laughing, would it in the future understand that perhaps it is just a short brushstroke for a writer?" "When that writer looks at the sky… I wonder, who will be the writer?" "There is no end… just like how Dao is boundless."

this is prolly not gonna qualify either...

 

[SuperNova55555]

what about

Everything in the world ends. Eternal life… is just something that comes along. The true goal of cultivation is to pursue the truth!" A glint appeared in Su Ming's eyes, and his footsteps became firmer. "To search for the truth, to search for an answer to a question. This… is the goal of the cultivators of my generation and why we practice cultivation. Getting stronger and having longevity are just affiliations in the path of pursuing the truth." "When we search for the truth, we also cultivate the truth!" "When we seek understanding, we also cultivate understanding. I, Su Ming, practiced cultivation because I wanted to understand what is happening around me. I wanted answers to my questions. It is just like what they say, Dao is the truth. Even though life is ephemeral… we can leave the world with a smile." As he gained his epiphany, Su Ming gradually gained an unfathomable presence. It was faint, and there was only a hint of it, but its appearance made it look like Su Ming was about to become transparent. It was as if at that moment, he surpassed Harmonious Morus Alba! "But even if I pursue the truth, even if I pursue understanding, it is only for an answer. But the phrase "to seek the answer" means that the path of cultivating Dao… is destined to be boundless." "You will never know where the end is… because the path of cultivation is only differentiated by how far different individuals can go. The end can never be seen." Su Ming smiled. He looked like he had just been freed from something. With his epiphany, he laughed, and his laughter gradually grew louder. "I live in Harmonious Morus Alba's wings, but in whose body does Harmonious Morus Alba live? Even that life hosting Harmonious Morus Alba will only live for a short moment. When it lifts its head, would it not see that it is living in another life that will only live for a short moment? And when that life hosting these two is laughing, would it in the future understand that perhaps it is just a short brushstroke for a writer?" "When that writer looks at the sky… I wonder, who will be the writer?" "There is no end… just like how Dao is boundless."

this is prolly not gonna qualify either...

T0 because it says Boundless

 

[XuQingXiYi]

T0 because it says Boundless

 

[May_Alter]

You’d assume that the first 3 paragraphs of my original message being about non-discursivity would even somewhat contextually relate to my last one, but alright. Nevermind that though, I’m really curious to what could even be causally posterior to matter of all things.

You made an ontological claim which is "contextually relevant" to what you'd been asserting, I'm not sure how you think I'm saying what you said is not that but okay... All composite things are causally posterior to matter for they are actus informantes and non-subsistent. Proportionally analogical to how the ceiling is causally posterior to the chain which holds a lamp above the ground.

 

[Hecky2222]

🫩 get a room

 

[SuperNova55555]

You made an ontological claim which is "contextually relevant" to what you'd been asserting, I'm not sure how you think I'm saying what you said is not that but okay... All composite things are causally posterior to matter for they are actus informantes and non-subsistent. Proportionally analogical to how the ceiling is causally posterior to the chain which holds a lamp above the ground.

Oh, that’s fine. It just means it’s not causally prior in the sense I’m talking about this thread, so it’s a pointless critique, really.

 

[May_Alter]

Oh, that’s fine. It just means it’s not causally prior in the sense I’m talking about this thread, so it’s a pointless critique, really.

No, it is. That is what is conveyed by causally prior. What pseudo philosophical notion of causal priority are you using then?

 

[SuperNova55555]

No, it is. That is what is conveyed by causally prior. What pseudo philosophical notion of causal priority are you using then?

That’s not the issue here. It is causally prior but not in the sense of a lesser unified principle following from a more unified one, which is what is contextually being talked about here, so the non-discursive principle is prior because it holds the discursive things as unified in-itself. Matter, as unlimited, becomes infinite potency & multitude. Unless there is some philosopher I don’t know about that holds that matter is definite, and thus holds the subject and predicate prior to their division. So I call it a pointless critique because you’re just isolating my comment.

 

[May_Alter]

not in the sense of a lesser unified principle following from a more unified one, which is what is contextually being talked about here,

Gibberish.

holds the discursive things as unified in-itself

...Hopefully, you mean that in a virtual sense in relation to the Divine Mind and not that they are not logical beings within it, otherwise you'll compromise Divine Conceptualism which would compromise the explanatory power of God to begin with (actually you already have lol).

So, may you actually stipulate an actual definition for causal priority that isn't nonsense.

Matter, as unlimited, becomes infinite potency & multitude

Becomes infinite potency? What. It does not become "multitude" either, that belongs to matter secunda not matter prima which is being spoken of here youre mixing the terms up.

Unless there is some philosopher I don’t know about that holds that matter is definite, and thus holds the subject and predicate prior to their division.

correlation. You purported two conditions which entail a being being H1-A+. In case it is not clear, I'm using this as a reductio. Whatever it being definite has anything to do with what I've said, and not even going to comment on the inference here.

 

[SuperNova55555]

...Hopefully, you mean that in a virtual sense in relation to the Divine Mind and not that they are not logical beings within it, otherwise you'll compromise Divine Conceptualism which would compromise the explanatory power of God to begin with (actually you already have lol).

So, may you actually stipulate an actual definition for causal priority that isn't nonsense.

Not sure why it’s assumed I’m speaking of the incorrect type of unity.

So in a sense, it is Knowledge-through-Being having no logical gap between the two.

Becomes infinite potency? What. It does not become "multitude" either, that belongs to matter secunda not matter prima which is being spoken of here your mixing the terms up.

But primary matter can be neither numerically nor specifically identical with an efficient cause; for the former is merely potential, while the latter is actual. Secondly, because, since God is the first efficient cause, to act belongs to Him primarily and essentially. But that which enters into composition with anything does not act primarily and essentially, but rather the composite so acts; for the hand does not act, but the man by his hand; and, fire warms by its heat. Hence God cannot be part of a compound. Thirdly, because no part of a compound can be absolutely primal among beings---not even matter, nor form, though they are the primal parts of every compound. For matter is merely potential; and potentiality is absolutely posterior to actuality, as is clear from the foregoing (Q[3], A[1]): while a form which is part of a compound is a participated form; and as that which participates is posterior to that which is essential, so likewise is that which is participated; as fire in ignited objects is posterior to fire that is essentially such. Now it has been proved that God is absolutely primal being (Q[2], A[3]).

Summa Theologica, Question 3, Article, 8 - Whether God enters into the composition of other things?

Again, is there some philosopher I don’t know about that holds primary matter as not being potential? Aquinas and Aristotle definitely don’t, and neither do any Neoplatonists like Plotinus and Proclus. Maybe Russell does. But his opinion doesn’t count.

Gibberish.

It’s not, btw.

This is how procession, particularly Neoplatonic procession works. Obviously not to mean that ‘unity’ is some sum of parts, but rather conditioning and transcending what is posterior to them. For One & Many, it is numerical identity (unity) of Knowledge & Being, conditioning the relations between logical Sameness and Difference. For One-Many, it is numerical identity (unity) of Activity & Being, conditioning Part-Whole relations. For the One, it is simply Unity.

It is the main component of the Limited & Unlimited, actually, all pre-conditioned by the One. The former is the definiteness and stability of the principle itself (it’s intrinsic unity, essentially), whereas the latter is the infinite potential emanated downwards. What grounds a thing through Being, contains the grounded in a more transcendental and unified sense. In fact, continuous unification is the entire goal of these schools of thought.

Elements of Theology, Prop. 18

 

[May_Alter]

Not sure why it’s assumed I’m speaking of the incorrect type of unity.

Because you DO in fact do that. A "logical gap", or more accurately a logical distinction is one that is a mere product of the mind and has no reality, i.e. one based on second-order concepts and so logical beings. A virtual distinction is one in which there is a real distinction which serves as the foundation for a distinction made within the mind.

Again, is there some philosopher I don’t know about that holds primary matter as not being potential? Aquinas and Aristotle definitely don’t, and neither do any Neoplatonists like Plotinus and Proclus. Maybe Russell does. But his opinion doesn’t count.

When did I say it does not count as pure potential, could you clarify on how you infer that? Your citation has nothing to do with what you said nor what I've said by the way.

It’s not, btw.

It is to the extent that:

causally prior but not in the sense of a lesser unified principle following from a more unified one, which is what is contextually being talked about here,

The conditions you said guaranteed H1-A+ were causal priority and non-discurisivity. I chose to ignore the "but" since I suppose it was a typo for otherwise it would be the case that you conceded (by virtue of hedging) instead of you just being confused. Moreover, you just went ahead and admitted that there is no difference between causal power and causal power with 'procession' by subscribing to the Neoplatonist and accordingly matter would partake in procession for you agreed it has causal priority.

 

[SuperNova55555]

Because you DO in fact do that. A "logical gap", or more accurately a logical distinction is one that is a mere product of the mind and has no reality, i.e. one based on second-order concepts and so logical beings. A virtual distinction is one in which there is a real distinction which serves as the foundation for a distinction made within the mind.

So do you think H1A+ here has logical distinction?

When did I say it does not count as pure potential, could you clarify on how you infer that? Your citation has nothing to do with what you said nor what I've said by the way.

Becomes infinite potency? What. It does not become "multitude" either

The second sentence is a negation of the predicate, and ‘either’ at the end of it is an adverb that signifies the similar negation of the predicate of the preceding sentence, here being ‘infinite potency’. So either you think:

1. Primary Matter isn’t potency
2. Primary Matter is finite potency

So whichever you want. The citation is just one particular instance of Aquinas re-affirming Primary Matter is potency. As juxtaposed to God (maximal actuality), no less.

It is to the extent that:
The conditions you said guaranteed H1-A+ were causal priority and non-discurisivity. I chose to ignore the "but" since I suppose it was a typo for otherwise it would be the case that you conceded (by virtue of hedging) instead of you just being confused. Moreover, you just went ahead and admitted that there is no difference between causal power and causal power with 'procession' by subscribing to the Neoplatonist and accordingly matter would partake in procession for you agreed it has causal priority.

So does Primary Matter hold the unity between Subject and Predicate but as transcended? Because that’s what the paragraph implies, which naturally becomes incoherent because you also admit Primary Matter is potency. Or don’t. I can’t tell since you’ve been contradicting yourself.

 

[May_Alter]

So do you think H1A+ here has logical distinction?

All things can have logical distinctions, sure.

So either you think:

You're so confused, lol. You presupposed that matter prima at t is not infinite potential yourself, for it "becomes infinite potential", thus what has been negated is that nonsense presupposition

Primary Matter hold the unity between Subject and Predicate but as transcended but as transcended?

Supernova discovers reductio, chills. Like you do realize, I am not of this opinion correct and I do not need to answer any of these questions, these are questions you have to consider and answer yourself for these are things entailed by your beliefs which I'm explicitizing. Also can you stop putting words together.

Because that’s what the paragraph implies, which naturally becomes incoherent because you also admit Primary Matter is potency

What's the incoherency? Go on.

 

[SuperNova55555]

You're so confused, lol. You presupposed that matter prima at t is not infinite potential yourself, for it "becomes infinite potential", thus what has been negated is that nonsense presupposition

Oh my god. It’s not that hard to read the sentence properly; ‘become’ is not to say that Matter actively changes state into more potency, but rather to signify that it is a derivative consequence of it’s ontology. Like saying ‘Intellect becomes unified due to the One’; it doesn’t literally mean Intellect ‘becomes’ it.

Supernova discovers reductio, chills. Like you do realize, I am not of this opinion correct and I do not need to answer any of these questions, these are questions you have to consider and answer yourself for these are things entailed by your beliefs which I'm explicitizing. Also can you stop putting words together.

So not an answer.

it would be the case that you conceded

And since you care about it, I’ll just take this as a concession on your end.

What's the incoherency? Go on.

Pure potency like primary matter is not an existent such as to possess unity, because it would also follow that it possesses determinacy & conception.

All things can have logical distinctions, sure.

Nah this one’s on me. I mixed the two together in my original comment.

 

[May_Alter]

Oh my god. It’s not that hard to read the sentence properly; ‘become’ is not to say that Matter actively changes state into more potency, but rather to signify that it is a derivative consequence of it’s ontology. Like saying ‘Intellect becomes unified due to the One’; it doesn’t literally mean Intellect ‘becomes’ it.

that belongs to matter secunda not matter prima which is being spoken of here youre mixing the terms up.

Stop being a p-zombie and take into consideration your own words. "Matter actively changes state into more potency" straight up nonsense, it becomes actualized not "more potency"

So not an answer.

L Lawliet.

And since you care about it, I’ll just take this as a concession on your end.

Non sequitur final boss.

Pure potency like primary matter is not an existent such as to possess unity, because it would also follow that it possesses determinacy & conception.

Blundered. Unity is the greatest transcendental attribute, i.e. an attribute that is co-extensive with being, which states that a thing is one. The fact that matter prima is called being-in-potency loosely speaking, is indicative of the possession thereof. It can possess truth, but in an analogical sense so to preserve the co-extensivity of the transcendental attributes with one another and being. It possessing truth in a different sense than it possesses unity is no issue either for the latter concerns ontology, the former epistemology. To put it simply truth is the relation of the mind to being whereas unity is a relation of a being to itself, of being itself. Additionally, if it did not possess unity, it'd mean you could "divide" matter prima and it'd be matter prima need I say, it is nonsense for it implies matter prima has parts which have their own matter prima to be divided and that these parts are identical to the whole.

Even ignoring all that has been said, let us suppose it does not have unity. If it does not have unity, it has no being (for they are co-extensive), therefore it is not. If it is not, there is no change as that is what is granted by potency. This is absurd innit, thus by reductio ad absurdum we'd grant that it does have being and so unity properly at the very least.

 

[Orioreeem]

@SuperNova55555 why is your husbend so mean to you?

 

[SuperNova55555]

Stop being a p-zombie and take into consideration your own words. "Matter actively changes state into more potency" straight up nonsense, it becomes actualized not "more potency"

L Lawliet.

Non sequitur final boss.

Blundered. Unity is the greatest transcendental attribute, i.e. an attribute that is co-extensive with being, which states that a thing is one. The fact that matter prima is called being-in-potency loosely speaking, is indicative of the possession thereof. It can possess truth, but in an analogical sense so to preserve the co-extensivity of the transcendental attributes with one another and being. It possessing truth in a different sense than it possesses unity is no issue either for the latter concerns ontology, the former epistemology. To put it simply truth is the relation of the mind to being whereas unity is a relation of a being to itself, of being itself. Additionally, if it did not possess unity, it'd mean you could "divide" matter prima and it'd be matter prima need I say, it is nonsense for it implies matter prima has parts which have their own matter prima to be divided and that these parts are identical to the whole.

Even ignoring all that has been said, let us suppose it does not have unity. If it does not have unity, it has no being (for they are co-extensive), therefore it is not. If it is not, there is no change as that is what is granted by potency. This is absurd innit, thus by reductio ad absurdum we'd grant that it does have being and so unity properly at the very least.

Snore

@SuperNova55555 why is your husbend so mean to you?

Not married by the way. I, for one, respect age laws.

 

[God_of_perversion]

They were fighting for days
At last, Supernova saw victory at his grasps—
Until suddenly, May Alter quotes: "What is a high tier LoTM supporter, to a High Tier Nasuverse supporter

 

[Hecky2222]

What is a high tier LoTM supporter, to a High Tier ORV supporter

Fixed

 

[XuQingXiYi]

They were fighting for days
At last, Supernova saw victory at his grasps—
Until suddenly, May Alter quotes: "What is a high tier LoTM supporter, to a High Tier Nasuverse supporter

Got caught changing ORV to Nasuverse

 

[XuQingXiYi]

When looking at the conversation above...

The actions of Summer Immortals surpassed their perceptions. Not even the empress could see everything that was happening. It was all a blur. And thus, all onlookers, be they in the imperial capital or Revered Ancient as a whole, saw nothing but a host of abstract, complicated vortexes!

SuperNova and May Alter= Summer Immortals
Me= Onlookers...

 

[Tarcaver]

Will metaphysics discussion like this be the new meta going forward when it comes to wanking your favorite verses?
God damn, I better read up some books.