From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Thu Jul 25 2002 - 01:50:16 MDT
One of the problems in the parsing of the statement 'everything
is relative' is that it is routinely and erroneously read as 'every thing is
relative'. This is true enough; every object in the universe holds a
position that is relative to the positions of the rest of the objects in the
universe. However, 'everything (the universe) cannot be relative, for
there is nothing outside the universe for it to be relative TO; it is all-
encompassing and sui generis, and as such cannot be said to itself
occupy a position relative to anything else, for there is nothing else (this
is the meaning of 'universe - all). Likewise, every thought or concept or
meaning or idea is relative, contextually, to every other; however, the
totality of thought-as-such, or conception-as-such, or meaning-as-such,
or ideation-as-such, is a dynaically evolving but at every moment
complete system, as is the universe itself, and cannot be considered to
be relative to any (nonexistent) thought or conception or meaning or
idea outside of it.
Isn't that Blunderful? ;~)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:49 MDT