Chapter 14: Volition’s Basic Determinants, Part III—Teleions: Difference between revisions
Chapter 14: Volition’s Basic Determinants, Part III—Teleions (view source)
Revision as of 14:05, 21 April 2024
, 21 April→14.8. Concluding Remarks: Added a paragraph to this section, as well as an additional reference to the chapter.
MWMoiceanu (talk | contribs) |
MWMoiceanu (talk | contribs) (→14.8. Concluding Remarks: Added a paragraph to this section, as well as an additional reference to the chapter.) |
||
| Line 280: | Line 280: | ||
When interpreted in conjunction with Buddhist tenets, the actualized apeiroson can be equated to the actualization of “Nirvana without remainder”. When viewed from a Buddhist perspective, when being is contemplated from the stance of ultrareality there in fact is no-self, this being the doctrine of Anatta, for all I-ness only occurs due to the poieture, which is again deemed illusory in an ultimate sense, and which can itself be here further conformant to what is termed ''saṃsāra''. | When interpreted in conjunction with Buddhist tenets, the actualized apeiroson can be equated to the actualization of “Nirvana without remainder”. When viewed from a Buddhist perspective, when being is contemplated from the stance of ultrareality there in fact is no-self, this being the doctrine of Anatta, for all I-ness only occurs due to the poieture, which is again deemed illusory in an ultimate sense, and which can itself be here further conformant to what is termed ''saṃsāra''. | ||
In Chinese philosophy, there occurs the concept of ''wuji'', which originally referenced infinity. This term first appeared in the Tao Te Ching in the context of returning to one’s true nature<ref>Wikipedia contributors. (2024, April 1). Wuji (philosophy). In ''Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia''. Retrieved 04:28, April 21, 2024, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wuji_(philosophy)&oldid=1216747059</ref>:<blockquote>“Know whiteness, Maintain blackness, and be a model for all under heaven. By being a model for all under heaven, Eternal integrity will not err. If eternal integrity does not err, You will return to infinity [aka, wuji].”</blockquote>In so being addressed, the wuji as contextualized by the just mentioned Taoist quote conforms to the apeiroson being the euteleion. | In Chinese philosophy, there occurs the concept of ''wuji'', which originally referenced infinity. This term first appeared in the Tao Te Ching in the context of returning to one’s true nature<ref>Wikipedia contributors. (2024, April 1). Wuji (philosophy). In ''Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia''. Retrieved 04:28, April 21, 2024, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wuji_(philosophy)&oldid=1216747059</ref>:<blockquote>“Know whiteness, Maintain blackness, and be a model for all under heaven. By being a model for all under heaven, Eternal integrity will not err. If eternal integrity does not err, You will return to infinity [aka, wuji].”<ref>Mair, Victor H., ed. (1990), ''Tao Te Ching: The Classic Book of Integrity and the Way'', New York, NY: Bantam Books, ISBN 978-0-307-43463-0</ref></blockquote>In so being addressed, the wuji as contextualized by the just mentioned Taoist quote conforms to the apeiroson being the euteleion. | ||
The Tao Te Ching furthermore states that “The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao. The name that can be named is not the eternal name. The nameless is the beginning of heaven and earth.” This can well make sense were the term ''Tao'' as here addressed to refer to the pure protocepture—be it either as an actualized apeiroson or in fragmented form—for the pure protocepture of itself can only be nonpoietural in full, whereas all that can be said can only be poietural in nature. (Given apeirosonism, the same reasoning can also viably apply to the proposed ineffability of “G-d”.) | The Tao Te Ching furthermore states that “The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao. The name that can be named is not the eternal name. The nameless is the beginning of heaven and earth.” This can well make sense were the term ''Tao'' as here addressed to refer to the pure protocepture—be it either as an actualized apeiroson or in fragmented form—for the pure protocepture of itself can only be nonpoietural in full, whereas all that can be said can only be poietural in nature. (Given apeirosonism, the same reasoning can also viably apply to the proposed ineffability of “G-d”.) | ||
| Line 546: | Line 546: | ||
= 14.8. Concluding Remarks = | = 14.8. Concluding Remarks = | ||
Despite this chapters lengthy (yet still superficial) presentations, the only unfalsified certainties which this chapter shall uphold will be as follows: a) the prototelos logically necessitates what has been termed teleions, b) no one here concerned can conceive of a synteleion (this being a conceivable teleion wherein the prototelos becomes fully satisfied) which i) | Despite this chapters lengthy (yet still superficial) presentations, the only unfalsified certainties which this chapter shall uphold will be as follows: a) the prototelos logically necessitates what has been termed teleions, b) no one here concerned can conceive of a synteleion (this being a conceivable teleion wherein the prototelos becomes fully satisfied) which i) has not been presented in this chapter but which ii) is fully accordant to all unfalsified certainties previously established in this work, c) we can also conceive of that possibility wherein no synteleion is possible to actualize, here termed the dysteleion and, d) out of the four conceivable synteleions and the dysteleion, at least one of these teleions will necessarily be an ontically certain euteleion for oneself as an eidemic protocept. | ||
The four synteleions this chapter presents will then serve as the ultimate constrains to what we as eidems can become or else be—with a formalized ontology to be itself in large part derived in later portions of this work from these same four ultimate constrains to protoceptual being. | |||
= • References = | = • References = | ||