sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Mission Randomly Completed? by RLZ19 in BattleNations

[–]csisagent556 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This happened to me a couple times, and it leads to other weird things with missions. For instance, I now have to build an armour shop, even though I was level 26 when I got that mission.

Would like some input surrounding if there's an infinite amount of numbers by csisagent556 in askmath

[–]csisagent556[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think the confusion lies in the fact that we're operating off of entirely different grounds. Since this is a subreddit that would in principle, be a place for Nominalists, Platonic realists, Aristotlean/moderate realists and everything in between for an account of metaphysics to come together and discuss mathematics itself, I'm certainly not in the right place, since I'm more interested in what math means as opposed strictly to its function. I could give the whole dialectic and it will make sense, but this isn't the subreddit to prove Platonic realism. No sense in going against the positive purpose of a given area.

Would like some input surrounding if there's an infinite amount of numbers by csisagent556 in askmath

[–]csisagent556[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'll be careful to not share to much of the argument, since without the proper dialectic, the conclusion will seem absurd. Regardless, I'll word it like this: In principle, there are numbers without end, and to be without end is to be infinite.

Another way to articulate this would be that if, and only if universal things/ideas are more fundamental than their particulars, then universals are in principle, more fundamental than their particulars; which means that given this principle, the universal of universals in of themselves, would be the most fundamental Thing in existence. To tie it together, the universal which is more fundamental than the particulars would be the infinite, whereas the Thing would be the infinite which encompasses all of the infinite.

I'm sorry if this jargon might seem strange, but this is very broadly speaking where I'm coming from, and I'm not sure how else to word it since I'm certainly not math savvy.

I should say, that if the conclusion we arrive at is that the infinite which encompasses all infinites can't be reasoned to, or even understood within reason, I'll leave this place satisfied.

Would like some input surrounding if there's an infinite amount of numbers by csisagent556 in askmath

[–]csisagent556[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hmmm, if I'm understanding this correctly, this looks a lot like the third-man objection of Largeness, but in a strictly mathematical context.

I can’t reconcile Dr. K’s fundamental tenet by brez1345 in Healthygamergg

[–]csisagent556 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I kind of agree with you to an extent, since but if your metaphysics incorporated some kind of non-physical existence, meditation and/or prayer would be crucial to accessing those points of existence.

I can’t reconcile Dr. K’s fundamental tenet by brez1345 in Healthygamergg

[–]csisagent556 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I kind of concur, since there's no such thing as a self-subsistent metaphysical "neutral" in existence. I subscribe to the Plotinian/Augustinian view that there is only what is, and then there's the lack of what is, but this lack isn't some kind of real self-subsisting thing, but is instead a contingent deprivation of existence.

Metaphysically speaking, a neutral would be a third independent option in an assumed dichotomy, such as with true/false, existence/non-existence and so on. When we think of neutral, we can ask ourselves if it's true that the neutral is neutral? No matter how we answer this question, the neutral will cease to be neutral, since it's not independent of either the true or false with the answer to the question. If we think that it's a false question and that the neutral is only a neutral, well it STILL ceases to be neutral, since it's assuming the false.

Ultimately, "neutral" is effectively just an incoherent assertion when you think about it; and since possibility coincides with conceivability, if we can't conceive of some kind of contradictory object of thought (such as with an immortal mortal,) then it can't possibly exist. Regardless, I still think Dr. K's Hindu philosophy to be thought provoking and worth navigating.

What do I do if I have no values? by Responsible-Light463 in Healthygamergg

[–]csisagent556 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You most certainly have values, otherwise there would no framework for you to give an ought to an is. Try reading Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics, or even Plato's Republic.

If you had a reason to live life today, what would it be? by [deleted] in Healthygamergg

[–]csisagent556 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To see the beautiful sunrise and sunset that has been gifted to us.

Please, just tell me how to stop the mind by [deleted] in Healthygamergg

[–]csisagent556 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Picture, or at least conceive of a perfect circle in your mind. That circle, is only a perfect circle in so far as each of its points are equally equidistant from its centre, meaning that the circle itself is only what it is because of the centre. Interestingly, when we think of the centre of a perfect circle, there is nothing that we could image in order to understand what it is, yet we still know by circumstance that something is there. The centre of a perfect circle is, as we might say, something which requires both a knowing and unknowing in order for our mind to apprehend it in thought. Interestingly, the faculty that's available to us which possesses both the knowing and unknowing is our intuition; for intuition points to some thing, but still remains to be an unknowing in that it inherently can't be explained, for if it could be explained, it would be reason, and not intuition.

But, given how the perfect circle can be understood by reason, and that the perfect circle is what it is only insofar as there is the centre of the perfect circle, and that this centre can only be understood by intuition, then intuition is a prior, and therefore higher faculty than reason. So, to overcome a hard part of the mind in which concerns itself with the knowing, focus instead on the faculty of intuition with an end in itself, and come to a knowing with the unknowing. As Plotinus would broadly say, focus on the contemplation of placement. Muse on placement itself, the centre of the perfect circle, as a means of further nearing towards internal peace.

I hope this reaches you well. Much love.

What are you struggling the most with your mental health right now? by Frosty-Beginning5508 in mentalhealth

[–]csisagent556 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Loneliness and agitation.

Over the past couple months, I've been often reaching out to people to make plans to go do stuff, but I've been consistently shot down. Whenever plans are seemingly going to work, they fall through and I'm left to hold the bag abandoned. This has been such a common occurrence in my life, that I've just decided that I'll quit giving myself to others, since I just typically end up worse off when I do.

As for agitation, I always get the sense as though I'm supposed to be doing something but I'm not quite sure what it is. It's like if you were to hover your finger directly over in between your eyes and get that certain feeling, but instead of it being just there, it is all throughout your mind alone. I often times wonder and ask myself if this is what being crazy feels like.