Thank you John and James! What a great discussion! I always find myself with a notepad full of additional thinkers and books I have to get to, and I see tonight that James' new book is now available on Amazon to purchase (but is a little outside my amateur budget, however much I would like to support him!) I look forward to more of these discussions John. Thanks again
Oooh! Thanks John for promoting Filler. Imagine a fantastic round table discussion with you two, Matt Segall and McGilchrist?!? And how about adding Rupert Sheldrake and Mark Vernon?!? I think my little phenomenologist head might explode. Lotsa love 🙏🏽❤️
I have reveres for many people who present cares to the world. Whether they are conservative or progressive or feminist or masculinist, if the rescue is real, I have respect for revere for them. Dr.Petersom, Dr.Vervaeke, Dr.Chung and many others, they presented cares to the world, so I respect and honor them.
Awesome talk! Filler showed me that anamnesis is real. Once I got his argument it just feels like I already knew it lol. May Prime Relationality bless him!
Thesedays, although not my main study, I am learning Japanese food for critic to introduce the cultures to people, while I am doing this, I always come to Dr.Vervaeke and Dr.Peterson's channel, it would be great care for people, I hope these people have good year 2024 and I think cares given by them are invaluable by anyone ^^
"Identity" in the mathematical meaning of equivalence relation is secondary to the differentiation process of distinction creation by autopoietic in-forming. Mereology is by definition an inequivalence relation: The whole is greater than the part (5th Common notion in Euclid's Elementa). Platonic mereology and Greek mathematics as developed in the Akademeia are naturally holistic mereology. In holistic foundational formal language that includes also a Stern-Brocot type top-down view of number theory (coprime fractions are generated first), the generating nesting structure of 'Creation Operator' (to lend term form QM) is a relational codependence: Symbols < and > expressing directed continuous movement (cf momenta, acceleration etc.) as the ontological primitive, and the generator < > expressing movement outwards from their co-created and shared interval in-between. The generative algorithm is called "concatenating mediants": < > < > < > < > > etc. Equivalence relation, when comparing comparable magnitudes, can be derived from modal negation of differentiation: When A and B cease to increase and decrease relative to each other so that A is neither more nor less than B, then A=B. Equivalence relations thus emerge from inwards movement > < that can coincide into halting >
Man, it would be cool to have someone like Eric Perl particiapte in this conversation. Perhaps John's people could reach out to him. I think he could offer important contributions.
Man, John is amazing. He is always making a connection and bringing us along. Thank you, John. And I'll try to get the book you review here on relational oncology. ❤
The implication that seems as challenging as interesting is Matrix/Plato's Cave that is programmable only from the inside, cf. the Matrix trilogy. Relational ontology negates Objective Realism, and with that the Correspondence theory of Truth. Thus we are left with the Coherence theory of Truth, in which the primary truth condition from a participant perspective is belonging to a coherent whole.
I think it's important to distinguish two different ways of thinking about potentiality. One way, which I believe is wrong, is to think that potentiality is ontologically prior to actuality, in the sense that it pre-exists actuality and is already "there", independently from actualization. I think it's wrong because actualization is not a selection of a pre-existing potentiality. The angel is not already in the piece of marble, prior to being sculpted from it (even though the marble presents the conditions and constraints that make the sculpture of the angel possible). There's no separate realm of forms/ideas that get instantiated in the "sensible world". Another way of conceiving potentiality, which I think is more correct, is to say that potentiality (or one may call it virtuality) is the indefinite, the apeiron, the field of possibility that enables actualization. It may be said that potentiality is real, but it doesn't exist (in the etymological sense of ex-sistere, to stand out) until it is actualized. From potentiality to actuality there is true creation, true innovation, true introduction of novelty. In this sense, the apeiron is the "ever-receding boundary" of possibility from which nature grows into itself (or towards which nature reaches out as it grows out of itself). But it's not a stock of pre-existing forms waiting to get selected and actualized. It's pregnant no-thingness, the fertile horizon through which nature advances into itself. Whitehead talked of "the creative advance of nature" and Bergson of duration as "the continuous progress of the past which gnaws into the future and which swells as it advances". (Even though Whitehead retained some level of Platonism with his notion of eternal objects).
Around 19 mins John says he can’t see how you get relata from relations but relations/relationality seeks connections/connectivity which is in-forming and therefore an attractive force resulting in the conversion of energy into mass. I think there are many scientists who could articulate this better than me. Further, relations/relationality isn’t an objective thing, possibly not even intersubjective, which means it’s probably transjective. Wonder what John thinks about this?
The Heidegger inspired philosophical school of Finnish Thinking (Tere Vaden, Pauli Pylkkö et alii) makes a big deal out Finnish morphology and semantics of "asubjective verbs" in indefinite person, which can form full grammatical sentences without any subject or object. From what I understand, similar grammatical phenomena exist is Navajo and other indigenous languages. As a native Finnish speaker, I associate "transjective" with asubjective verbs. Subject and object form a codependent pair, a distinction which can situationally arise and dissolve also on linguistic level. Asubjective verbs dissolve the distinction, but include also the potential of the distinction arising. PS: the physicalist concept of energy is very problematic, and digging deeper into that mess would require a long discussion.
John and James, a great conversation! But I do think your anxieties about Whitehead and process thinkers are premature. For example, John: There is no reason why Whitehead’s “ontological principle” (or Aristotelian principle, as he calls it) has to be read in terms of the priority or primacy of actuality over possibility. For Whitehead, the metaphysical inversion of the ontological principle also applies: the actual is nothing without the possible. That both possibility and actuality require each other is precisely how we reach the ultimacy of their relationally. I make this point in my book Mind, Value, and Cosmos: On the Relational Nature of Ultimacy (below). Arguably, substance is not fully dismissed either (although Descartes "nothing-but" substance certainly is) but re-thought in terms of atomic events that become out of their relations. Process philosophy is a rethinking of substance as verb-like event-relations embodying creativity. Creativity is Aristotle's prime matter rendered utterly active: It’s nothing without its embodiment in actuality. Also, I think you both would enjoy Chapter X of Whitehead’s great book Adventures of Ideas where he praises the Alexandrian theologians for improving upon Plato in terms of their relational affirmation of “mutual immanence” of all in all. They arrived at this “discovery” when wrestling with Trinitarian doctrine. James, I've not yet read your book, but I will! My own contribution to the ultimacy of relationality was my dissertation as well: www.amazon.com/Mind-Value-Cosmos-Relational-Contemporary-ebook/dp/B08MDLVWD4/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3D0ZWYLBQR0KP&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.vCk_1BMnl7_xLXp63xwRHndbUb8hveJHA4Gh0CEulW-ae8MUch-QTXtsDEpLG2giuYGrWaGdsPbWydFQn7XppJpSb7Z9AUOpAXgE17ZJSC1iG2GgRsq5kM84zH7ww2Zld4B1T9rgoiv5F6d8dZl4SAh_b7_zmAx3KdpZUi2OGR87Mui_btUQKcgwjTHWZiHEqyvegWfL6EZP31whe2drwtFl5r7ibrtFrJFEdRUeCs4.gOaZqqSGj1pxieEyT2sZx3dds0bxx7J3ZGl6jYHjp8w&dib_tag=se&keywords=Mind%2C+Value%2C+Cosmos&qid=1732389709&sprefix=mind%2C+value%2C+cosmos%2Caps%2C521&sr=8-1 Cheers andrewmdavis.info
What is actual (energeia) and potential (dynamis) is also contextually relational and perspectival. A very interesting question could be also how Whitehead relates with Proclus - whose commentary on Euclid I'm currently reading. AFAIK for Proclus the "true actual" is the Nous, and each part in-formed in Nous has the potential to become fully informed and fully actual, which I gather is the meaning of the Neoplatonic Apotheosis. What you say about process ontological substance (hypokeimenon, lying under) is very interesting. In mathematics the process ontological substance is the reflecting surface (both ideal and phenomenal to external senses) in which shadow projections of geometric Forms can be perceived in the mathematical science of Dianoia. I very pleasant surprise for has been the revelation that Proclus' Academic philosophy of mathematics is very close to David Bohm's philosophy of (quantum) physic: Holomovement and active information, explicate orders unfolding from implicate orders. Proclus even uses the same term - unfolding - to describe how mathematical forms unfold through dianoia (active information received as intuition) from the implicate orders of Nous into explicate orders perceived/projected by external senses e.g. as drawings on sand/computer screens. Bohm was deeply influenced by Whitehead, but AFAIK didn't read Bergson or Proclus directly, but came to similar views intuitively.
I think that Relational Ontology should be much more known (James also). There should be a marriage of Relational Ontology and the no-thingness of Sunnyata because each of them can help us understand the other much better. The Kyoto School work should be continued. Also, I wish that the lectern was more structured in clear topics like the one you did with Evan Thompson.
@@TheVeganVicar can only imaginge the concept of nothingness analytically split apart into an existent (?) that itself is "no thing" like other things your can intend, objectify and engage or operate with or even think about. The question in my understanding than is, what is the explanatory benefit of postulating a nothingness that exists but that is no thing whatsoever? Does this notion explain real structures of reality in order to make it plausible or even necessary that it has to exist? Graham priest makes a nice job by (very simplyfied) stating that nothingness is principally the background against with existence emerges. The idea of no-thingness ultimately can be related to other subjects. The self, consciousness, reality as a structured whole. Whenever you try to grasp reality in a thingy way, you as the selfreferential part of reality will leave the "whole" you try to adress as a thing incomplete. But maybe something else was meant. Also there is more to say. But i had a question to @The.Zen.Diogenes , how would you combine sunyata and kyoto school to relationality?
@TheVeganVicar It means that "things" do not have an independent existence. "By substance we can understand nothing else than an entity which is in such a way that it needs no other entity in order to be.” -Heidegger
@@TheVeganVicar Socrates' famous dictum "hen oida hoti ouden oida" is a pun. Literally translated: "The one I know is that not-one I know." In more fluent English translation: "The thing I know is no-thing". The pun presents 'relational One' Sunyata in a funny way. We should not think that Socrates and Plato were stupid, and that the dictum tries to propose nihilistic epitstemology.
I’m loving the conversation and planning on ordering the book, but I’m wondering if the book deals with Augustine’s conception of a relational substance (or substantial relation), Especially given Augustine’s influence on Heidegger
I have same love and respect for Dr.Vervaeke's conversation, and leaved reply with agreement about Augustine's inclusion to the book, but the reply contained my life experience, so I re-leave reply like this ^^ I thank you for Dr.Vervaeke, and jameswilosn799, it would be always good opportunity to come to this channel ^^
During the part where John mentions quantum entanglement, he refers to a book, I think “One” but couldn’t make out the author .. anyone know the book he’s referring to?
The quest of trying to figure it out as the imagination of being a Demi-Godhead and because of the incomprehensible and overwhelming itch of the turbulent unsettleness of the quandary that is your/our are own lives. Hey Icarus...
My appeal to every Muslim, my brother or sister, the owner of the channel, I know that it is not my right to comment on your channel, but God is my witness that our circumstances are harsh and forced me to do this. Please forgive me. My brother, there is still a brotherhood of faith. I asked you for a bag of flour. My brother, we women cannot go out among men. There is still a woman with you. My brother, God has honored you. You are men. We are women. We cannot go out or work like you. My brother, where is the brotherhood of faith in your hearts? We are women. There is no brotherhood, no mercy, no compassion, no humanity. And give good tidings to the patient. It is the greatest hope while waiting for what we want. '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' How many times I called and talked and tried hard, but no one responded. Oh man, we are with you. My mother ordered us food from the restaurant. More and today. My mother left. Crying. She said, Why are you crying, my mother? She said, My daughter, I ask. God, that I may be honored by death. She said, Why, my mother. She cursed us. She said, "My daughter, today the restaurant owner insulted me. I said, 'Why?' I said, 'How can I be better than people?' I ask God, my daughter. May God gather me. With death alone, a gathering that is better than this humiliation and this humiliation. It is true. I am saying this. It diminishes my value and respect. But, man. I swear to God that I did not say this. I kiss your boots. I am so hungry that my conscience no longer allows me to let you go and ask us for food. I kiss your boots, man, and I ask you by God Almighty and in the Book of God, man, I kiss your boots, man. He has caused us harm, my brother, so that we can buy a kilo of flour and pay the rent. My brother, have mercy on us. He who is in the show will have mercy on you, He who is in the sky. My brother, this is my WhatsApp number: 00967711500090. Whoever can help us, message me on WhatsApp. We will send him the full name. He will transfer us as much as he can. May Allah reward you. Allah knows that my family and I, our house rent is 15 thousand Yemeni riyals per month, and now we owe 45 thousand for 3 months. The owner of the house is one of those people who do not have mercy. By Allah, my brother, he comes every day and humiliates us and talks about us and wants to throw us out of the house and into the street because we were unable to pay him the rent. We will have until the end of the week, and if we pay him, he will swear by Allah that he will throw us out into the street without mercy. See my situation for yourselves. I ask you by Allah, the Living, the Eternal, to help me. By Allah, the Almighty, even at night we cannot sleep from fear. We do not have mattresses or blankets to warm ourselves from the cold. Everything is flooded from the rain, and we have no one but Allah and then you. My brothers, I kiss your boots, don’t turn me away empty-handed. Help us with whatever you can. Is it acceptable to you that we live in this place? We are girls and we have no one. Our father died in a car accident. Consider us your daughters and your honor, and help me with whatever you can. May God reward you with good =>[[}>] ^][/&;;&;&&;•̥·-•.,¸-•.,¸°·̮ •̥·°,.•¯,.•¯,;;;.≪∫⌈,.≪∫⌈,.≪∫⌈,.≪∫⌈,.≪∫⌈,.------------------------------،-------،---------،------------،-،-------,----،،،،،،،،/،،،🎉
As an admirer of yours, John, and as an Orthodox Christian, Thank you for introducing us to James.
Thank you John and James! What a great discussion! I always find myself with a notepad full of additional thinkers and books I have to get to, and I see tonight that James' new book is now available on Amazon to purchase (but is a little outside my amateur budget, however much I would like to support him!)
I look forward to more of these discussions John. Thanks again
Oooh! Thanks John for promoting Filler. Imagine a fantastic round table discussion with you two, Matt Segall and McGilchrist?!? And how about adding Rupert Sheldrake and Mark Vernon?!? I think my little phenomenologist head might explode. Lotsa love 🙏🏽❤️
Dr.Vervaeke has cares about the world and some generalization tackled him as someone's proof demand. I honor and respect his profession.
I have reveres for many people who present cares to the world. Whether they are conservative or progressive or feminist or masculinist, if the rescue is real, I have respect for revere for them.
Dr.Petersom, Dr.Vervaeke, Dr.Chung and many others, they presented cares to the world, so I respect and honor them.
Been waiting for this. Filler is so humble and his book so profound...and John is just fabulous John as always
What do you consider to be the MOST profound book ever composed, Matthew?
@TheVeganVicar the Bible. I'm a Christian. Fillers is up there for me though lol
The Enneads is up there also
@@matthewparlato5626, what is your favourite book of "The Bible", and what is your opinon of Genesis 1:29?
@TheVeganVicar I find it beautiful and as biblically illiterate as I am, I'd go "John"...pretty metaphysical
@@matthewparlato5626, surely you did not DELIBERATELY avoid my second question? 😲
Awesome talk! Filler showed me that anamnesis is real. Once I got his argument it just feels like I already knew it lol. May Prime Relationality bless him!
Thesedays, although not my main study, I am learning Japanese food for critic to introduce the cultures to people, while I am doing this, I always come to Dr.Vervaeke and Dr.Peterson's channel, it would be great care for people, I hope these people have good year 2024 and I think cares given by them are invaluable by anyone ^^
"Identity" in the mathematical meaning of equivalence relation is secondary to the differentiation process of distinction creation by autopoietic in-forming. Mereology is by definition an inequivalence relation: The whole is greater than the part (5th Common notion in Euclid's Elementa). Platonic mereology and Greek mathematics as developed in the Akademeia are naturally holistic mereology. In holistic foundational formal language that includes also a Stern-Brocot type top-down view of number theory (coprime fractions are generated first), the generating nesting structure of 'Creation Operator' (to lend term form QM) is a relational codependence:
Symbols < and > expressing directed continuous movement (cf momenta, acceleration etc.) as the ontological primitive, and the generator
< >
expressing movement outwards from their co-created and shared interval in-between. The generative algorithm is called "concatenating mediants":
< >
< >
< >
< > >
etc.
Equivalence relation, when comparing comparable magnitudes, can be derived from modal negation of differentiation:
When A and B cease to increase and decrease relative to each other so that A is neither more nor less than B, then A=B.
Equivalence relations thus emerge from inwards movement > < that can coincide into halting >
Man, it would be cool to have someone like Eric Perl particiapte in this conversation. Perhaps John's people could reach out to him. I think he could offer important contributions.
Agreed, Eric is a model of pellucidity
That would be incredible
Good, insightful dialogue - good spirit ; thank you
Man, John is amazing. He is always making a connection and bringing us along. Thank you, John. And I'll try to get the book you review here on relational oncology. ❤
Ontology - not cancer.
ontology
It would be interesting to hear more about the ethical implications of relational ontology.
The implication that seems as challenging as interesting is Matrix/Plato's Cave that is programmable only from the inside, cf. the Matrix trilogy. Relational ontology negates Objective Realism, and with that the Correspondence theory of Truth. Thus we are left with the Coherence theory of Truth, in which the primary truth condition from a participant perspective is belonging to a coherent whole.
Beautiful point re humility at the end of the conversation
My reaction on seeing this in my UA-cam feed: "Oh yeah, a new Vervaeke video 😃 .... Oh no, Heidegger 😧"
Excellent!
I think it's important to distinguish two different ways of thinking about potentiality.
One way, which I believe is wrong, is to think that potentiality is ontologically prior to actuality, in the sense that it pre-exists actuality and is already "there", independently from actualization.
I think it's wrong because actualization is not a selection of a pre-existing potentiality. The angel is not already in the piece of marble, prior to being sculpted from it (even though the marble presents the conditions and constraints that make the sculpture of the angel possible).
There's no separate realm of forms/ideas that get instantiated in the "sensible world".
Another way of conceiving potentiality, which I think is more correct, is to say that potentiality (or one may call it virtuality) is the indefinite, the apeiron, the field of possibility that enables actualization.
It may be said that potentiality is real, but it doesn't exist (in the etymological sense of ex-sistere, to stand out) until it is actualized.
From potentiality to actuality there is true creation, true innovation, true introduction of novelty.
In this sense, the apeiron is the "ever-receding boundary" of possibility from which nature grows into itself (or towards which nature reaches out as it grows out of itself).
But it's not a stock of pre-existing forms waiting to get selected and actualized.
It's pregnant no-thingness, the fertile horizon through which nature advances into itself.
Whitehead talked of "the creative advance of nature" and Bergson of duration as "the continuous progress of the past which gnaws into the future and which swells as it advances".
(Even though Whitehead retained some level of Platonism with his notion of eternal objects).
Around 19 mins John says he can’t see how you get relata from relations but relations/relationality seeks connections/connectivity which is in-forming and therefore an attractive force resulting in the conversion of energy into mass. I think there are many scientists who could articulate this better than me. Further, relations/relationality isn’t an objective thing, possibly not even intersubjective, which means it’s probably transjective. Wonder what John thinks about this?
The Heidegger inspired philosophical school of Finnish Thinking (Tere Vaden, Pauli Pylkkö et alii) makes a big deal out Finnish morphology and semantics of "asubjective verbs" in indefinite person, which can form full grammatical sentences without any subject or object. From what I understand, similar grammatical phenomena exist is Navajo and other indigenous languages.
As a native Finnish speaker, I associate "transjective" with asubjective verbs. Subject and object form a codependent pair, a distinction which can situationally arise and dissolve also on linguistic level. Asubjective verbs dissolve the distinction, but include also the potential of the distinction arising.
PS: the physicalist concept of energy is very problematic, and digging deeper into that mess would require a long discussion.
Is Desmond's "overdeterminate otherness" another name for relationality?
John and James, a great conversation! But I do think your anxieties about Whitehead and process thinkers are premature. For example, John: There is no reason why Whitehead’s “ontological principle” (or Aristotelian principle, as he calls it) has to be read in terms of the priority or primacy of actuality over possibility. For Whitehead, the metaphysical inversion of the ontological principle also applies: the actual is nothing without the possible. That both possibility and actuality require each other is precisely how we reach the ultimacy of their relationally. I make this point in my book Mind, Value, and Cosmos: On the Relational Nature of Ultimacy (below). Arguably, substance is not fully dismissed either (although Descartes "nothing-but" substance certainly is) but re-thought in terms of atomic events that become out of their relations. Process philosophy is a rethinking of substance as verb-like event-relations embodying creativity. Creativity is Aristotle's prime matter rendered utterly active: It’s nothing without its embodiment in actuality. Also, I think you both would enjoy Chapter X of Whitehead’s great book Adventures of Ideas where he praises the Alexandrian theologians for improving upon Plato in terms of their relational affirmation of “mutual immanence” of all in all. They arrived at this “discovery” when wrestling with Trinitarian doctrine. James, I've not yet read your book, but I will! My own contribution to the ultimacy of relationality was my dissertation as well: www.amazon.com/Mind-Value-Cosmos-Relational-Contemporary-ebook/dp/B08MDLVWD4/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3D0ZWYLBQR0KP&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.vCk_1BMnl7_xLXp63xwRHndbUb8hveJHA4Gh0CEulW-ae8MUch-QTXtsDEpLG2giuYGrWaGdsPbWydFQn7XppJpSb7Z9AUOpAXgE17ZJSC1iG2GgRsq5kM84zH7ww2Zld4B1T9rgoiv5F6d8dZl4SAh_b7_zmAx3KdpZUi2OGR87Mui_btUQKcgwjTHWZiHEqyvegWfL6EZP31whe2drwtFl5r7ibrtFrJFEdRUeCs4.gOaZqqSGj1pxieEyT2sZx3dds0bxx7J3ZGl6jYHjp8w&dib_tag=se&keywords=Mind%2C+Value%2C+Cosmos&qid=1732389709&sprefix=mind%2C+value%2C+cosmos%2Caps%2C521&sr=8-1
Cheers
andrewmdavis.info
What is actual (energeia) and potential (dynamis) is also contextually relational and perspectival.
A very interesting question could be also how Whitehead relates with Proclus - whose commentary on Euclid I'm currently reading. AFAIK for Proclus the "true actual" is the Nous, and each part in-formed in Nous has the potential to become fully informed and fully actual, which I gather is the meaning of the Neoplatonic Apotheosis.
What you say about process ontological substance (hypokeimenon, lying under) is very interesting. In mathematics the process ontological substance is the reflecting surface (both ideal and phenomenal to external senses) in which shadow projections of geometric Forms can be perceived in the mathematical science of Dianoia.
I very pleasant surprise for has been the revelation that Proclus' Academic philosophy of mathematics is very close to David Bohm's philosophy of (quantum) physic: Holomovement and active information, explicate orders unfolding from implicate orders. Proclus even uses the same term - unfolding - to describe how mathematical forms unfold through dianoia (active information received as intuition) from the implicate orders of Nous into explicate orders perceived/projected by external senses e.g. as drawings on sand/computer screens.
Bohm was deeply influenced by Whitehead, but AFAIK didn't read Bergson or Proclus directly, but came to similar views intuitively.
Great discussion, would be great to hear Matt Segall join the both of you 😀
Love the timing of the glitch at 32:45. Are we breaking out of the matrix/paradigm of substance ontology? :O :)
I think that Relational Ontology should be much more known (James also).
There should be a marriage of Relational Ontology and the no-thingness of Sunnyata because each of them can help us understand the other much better. The Kyoto School work should be continued.
Also, I wish that the lectern was more structured in clear topics like the one you did with Evan Thompson.
What do you mean by "no-thingness"?
@@TheVeganVicar can only imaginge the concept of nothingness analytically split apart into an existent (?) that itself is "no thing" like other things your can intend, objectify and engage or operate with or even think about. The question in my understanding than is, what is the explanatory benefit of postulating a nothingness that exists but that is no thing whatsoever? Does this notion explain real structures of reality in order to make it plausible or even necessary that it has to exist?
Graham priest makes a nice job by (very simplyfied) stating that nothingness is principally the background against with existence emerges. The idea of no-thingness ultimately can be related to other subjects. The self, consciousness, reality as a structured whole. Whenever you try to grasp reality in a thingy way, you as the selfreferential part of reality will leave the "whole" you try to adress as a thing incomplete.
But maybe something else was meant. Also there is more to say.
But i had a question to @The.Zen.Diogenes , how would you combine sunyata and kyoto school to relationality?
@TheVeganVicar It means that "things" do not have an independent existence.
"By substance we can understand nothing else than an entity which is in such a way that it needs no other entity in order to be.”
-Heidegger
@@TheVeganVicar Socrates' famous dictum "hen oida hoti ouden oida" is a pun. Literally translated: "The one I know is that not-one I know."
In more fluent English translation: "The thing I know is no-thing".
The pun presents 'relational One' Sunyata in a funny way. We should not think that Socrates and Plato were stupid, and that the dictum tries to propose nihilistic epitstemology.
@@The.Zen.Diogenes, in your own words, define “EXIST”. ☝️🤔☝️
I’m loving the conversation and planning on ordering the book, but I’m wondering if the book deals with Augustine’s conception of a relational substance (or substantial relation), Especially given Augustine’s influence on Heidegger
I have same love and respect for Dr.Vervaeke's conversation, and leaved reply with agreement about Augustine's inclusion to the book, but the reply contained my life experience, so I re-leave reply like this ^^ I thank you for Dr.Vervaeke, and jameswilosn799, it would be always good opportunity to come to this channel ^^
During the part where John mentions quantum entanglement, he refers to a book, I think “One” but couldn’t make out the author .. anyone know the book he’s referring to?
Heinrich Pas, "The One. How an Ancient Idea Holds The Future of Physics ".
Wouldn’t the multiplicity in actuality be potentiality?
John is bringing every author of his meaning crisis series books 😂
John, you really should let your guests talk and you should listen
The quest of trying to figure it out as the imagination of being a Demi-Godhead and because of the incomprehensible and overwhelming itch of the turbulent unsettleness of the quandary that is
your/our are own lives. Hey Icarus...
Is he a knowledge first philosopher then?
My appeal to every Muslim, my brother or sister, the owner of the channel, I know that it is not my right to comment on your channel, but God is my witness that our circumstances are harsh and forced me to do this. Please forgive me. My brother, there is still a brotherhood of faith. I asked you for a bag of flour. My brother, we women cannot go out among men. There is still a woman with you. My brother, God has honored you. You are men. We are women. We cannot go out or work like you. My brother, where is the brotherhood of faith in your hearts? We are women. There is no brotherhood, no mercy, no compassion, no humanity. And give good tidings to the patient. It is the greatest hope while waiting for what we want. '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' How many times I called and talked and tried hard, but no one responded. Oh man, we are with you. My mother ordered us food from the restaurant. More and today. My mother left. Crying. She said, Why are you crying, my mother? She said, My daughter, I ask. God, that I may be honored by death. She said, Why, my mother. She cursed us. She said, "My daughter, today the restaurant owner insulted me. I said, 'Why?' I said, 'How can I be better than people?' I ask God, my daughter. May God gather me. With death alone, a gathering that is better than this humiliation and this humiliation. It is true. I am saying this. It diminishes my value and respect. But, man. I swear to God that I did not say this. I kiss your boots. I am so hungry that my conscience no longer allows me to let you go and ask us for food. I kiss your boots, man, and I ask you by God Almighty and in the Book of God, man, I kiss your boots, man. He has caused us harm, my brother, so that we can buy a kilo of flour and pay the rent. My brother, have mercy on us. He who is in the show will have mercy on you, He who is in the sky. My brother, this is my WhatsApp number: 00967711500090. Whoever can help us, message me on WhatsApp. We will send him the full name. He will transfer us as much as he can. May Allah reward you. Allah knows that my family and I, our house rent is 15 thousand Yemeni riyals per month, and now we owe 45 thousand for 3 months. The owner of the house is one of those people who do not have mercy. By Allah, my brother, he comes every day and humiliates us and talks about us and wants to throw us out of the house and into the street because we were unable to pay him the rent. We will have until the end of the week, and if we pay him, he will swear by Allah that he will throw us out into the street without mercy. See my situation for yourselves. I ask you by Allah, the Living, the Eternal, to help me. By Allah, the Almighty, even at night we cannot sleep from fear. We do not have mattresses or blankets to warm ourselves from the cold. Everything is flooded from the rain, and we have no one but Allah and then you. My brothers, I kiss your boots, don’t turn me away empty-handed. Help us with whatever you can. Is it acceptable to you that we live in this place? We are girls and we have no one. Our father died in a car accident. Consider us your daughters and your honor, and help me with whatever you can. May God reward you with good =>[[}>] ^][/&;;&;&&;•̥·-•.,¸-•.,¸°·̮ •̥·°,.•¯,.•¯,;;;.≪∫⌈,.≪∫⌈,.≪∫⌈,.≪∫⌈,.≪∫⌈,.------------------------------،-------،---------،------------،-،-------,----،،،،،،،،/،،،🎉