Axiom 0 or ontological questioning]]
December 24th, 2007, search relatedRelated posts :: Yes, I Have No Holerons :: Is it merely Trivially True? :: CPI vs OD :: Allegations of Demolition
In a message dated 12/24/2007 12:26:07 AM Eastern Standard Time,
artefact at t-online.de writes:
……Philosophy, however, cannot take even ’space’ or ‘quantity’ for granted
as self-evident categories. For ontology there is no proposition that can be
posited in advance as a self-evident axiom which could then be used as a basis
for further deductions…
Michael;
If such were the case we would have to dismiss Anaximander and his apieron
and all notions of protohyle that are the primordial principle of nihilo, ousia
as nothing and which is the necessary first premise for thinking. That is why
Genesis must begin with a first day (of creation) as the non-differentiated
mass (qua The Void). The same is true for Parmenides’ tautologically predicated
Logos as It Is. In other words, an apophatic ontos must be established to
arrive at the kataphatic ontos simply because neither are based in perception but
the rational mode of concept formation. Perception does not require the Logos
whereas rational and concept-forming thinking does.
Bernard
**************************************See AOL’s top rated recipes
http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NC…)
