Lessons in Conventional Language

Is one infinite and finite? It it a thing, or not?

Whatever.

Ah, we've reached an impasse.
It is whatever you say it is...or is written in a book facilitating communication of what is both and neither.

One is "whatever"...you think it is at any given moment in space/time. Which is not defined unconventionally.

Is quantity finite or infinite?

I need to think less autistically.
Help me understand conventional understanding.

You're insane.

Is "one" a qualification of infinity or of the finite?
To be both would be a contradiction.
What is "one"?

I am now also "insane"...the diagnosis is clear and absolute, complete, and total.

You were always insane.

The master is the one who is not insane nor autistic...he is brilliant.
He understands the "high logic" of conventional thinking.
His only philosophy manual is a dictionary and his "common sense".

Magnus Anderson wrote:

You were always insane.

Am I eternally and absolutely insane?
Completely and perfectly so?

is one both infinite and finite, as the case may be?
Explain, man....I'm healing here.

Quote :

The master is the one who is not insane nor autistic...he is brilliant.

That's what you think of yourself.

Is "one" a some-thing or a no-thing....or an anything.

Is one bottle of wine on one table infinitely so, or is it finite?

Magnus Anderson wrote:

Quote :

The master is the one who is not insane nor autistic...he is brilliant.

That's what you think of yourself.

How can you know something which is infinite?
Unless it is finite?
Is my "insanity" infinite or finite?

Explain...ONE...is it finite or infinite?
Bounded or boundless?

I'm also surfing the net and watching the news at the same time. I may have missed your brilliant conventional explanation.
Repeat it, if you please, great master of conventional understanding, and of the English language.

I promise to "focus" on your response...meaning, I will remain indifferent to it.

Explain...ONE...is it finite or infinite?
Bounded or boundless?

How can the concept "human" apply across space/time?

Is the universe infinite or finite.
The one-verse.

Conventional definition

Quote :

u·ni·verse
/ˈyo͞onəˌvərs/
Learn to pronounce
noun
noun: universe; noun: the universe

   all existing matter and space considered as a whole; the cosmos. The universe is believed to be at least 10 billion light years in diameter and contains a vast number of galaxies; it has been expanding since its creation in the Big Bang about 13 billion years ago.
   synonyms: cosmos, macrocosm, totality, whole world, Creation, (outer) space, the heavens, the firmament; More
  infinity, all existence
   "the laws of the physical universe"
       a particular sphere of activity, interest, or experience.
       plural noun: universes
       "the front parlor was the hub of her universe"
       synonyms: province, world, sphere, preserve, domain, circle, milieu, territory, quarter
       "the ROM chip clearly belongs to the universe of hardware"
       another term for universal set.
       noun: universe of discourse; plural noun: universes of discourse

How is infinity conceptualized by the finite?
or
how does the infinite conceptualize the finite?

Furthermore, what does conventional thinking say about the question:


Who Put the Bomp (In the Bomp, Bomp, Bomp)

Master blaster said

Quote :

The word "one" isn't non-sensical even if you define it the way you do i.e. implying finitude.

The problem is the word "one" simply does not mean and never meant what you think it means. Consequently, the word "universe" does not mean and never meant what you think it means.

So, the "uni" does not mean "one". It means "single thing". Not "one thing".

Quote :

The word "one" isn't a metaphor.

So, every time it is used, it is literal.
A singularity - complete and perfect. Yet not infinite nor finite.

Quote :

I am of the strong opinion that:

1. the word "existence" never implied interactivity
2. the word "one" never implied finitude
3. the word "thing" never implied immutability
4. the word "universe" never implied finite space and time

"Strong statements"....
This conventional opinion in unconventionally brilliant.
Who thought that declarative statements could be so convincing?

Quote :

You can do the basic math, that's great. But can you understand that the word "one" implies no finitude?

What, then, does it imply?

Quote :

The word "one" does not imply infinity either. In other words, it's perfectly fine (it's not logically contradictory) to speak of physical objects that are finitely divisible.

It's "perfectly fine", to be self-contradicting.
So "things" are both finite and infinite...and that's "fine".

Quote :

The word "one" represents a quantity.

A finite/infinite quantity.
A "single thing", which is neither infinite nor finite...but both.

Quote :

However, there is one super-tiny but super-important thing that you fail to grasp and that is that the word "one" implies no finitude by definition.

So it is neither finite nor infinite.
It is quantity of "things" which are neither infinite nor finite....both and neither.
Depending on what suits us at any given time and place...both undefined concepts.
It is "useful" linguistics - every day lingo....good for the market, or for fucking.

Quote :

By definition, the word "one" implies neither finitude nor infinitude.

Quote :

Similarly, if something went from being finite to being infinite, it would be still be a single thing.

"Single thing" seems to be a binding concept.
A "single," not infinite nor finite, "thing," not bound by space/time.

What does this describe?

Quote :

Exactly. That's because position in space and time is a non-essential property of humans.

Space/Time is non-essential to the concept "human".
"Human" exist without space/time - independently.

What is, therefore, defined as Human?
An idea.
Words are not "metaphors".

Quote :

met·a·phor
/ˈmedəˌfôr,ˈmedəˌfər/
Learn to pronounce
noun
noun: metaphor; plural noun: metaphors

   a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable.
   "her poetry depends on suggestion and metaphor"
   synonyms: figure of speech, figurative expression, image, trope, allegory, parable, analogy, comparison, symbol, emblem, word painting, word picture; literaryconceit
       a thing regarded as representative or symbolic of something else, especially something abstract.
       "the amounts of money being lost by the company were enough to make it a metaphor for an

So "one" and "human" are literal, yet they are independent from space/time, and are both finite & infinite....and/or neither.
It depends on how you wish to apply your conventional "genius".
Some times it is; sometimes it ain't.

"Human", the idea, exist independently from space/time and yet within it.
Sounds like noumenon/phenomenon dichotomies, where noumenon is mistakenly assumed to be the phenomenon.
But that leis outside conventional thinking. So fuck it!

We can all learn a lesson here.

Quote :

So, every time it is used, it is literal.

Words can be used literally or figuratively.

For example, I can use the word "lion" to mean a wild animal or I can use it to mean a fierce warrior.
The second use would be an example of a metaphorical use.

The word "lion" on its own is not a metaphor.
In the same exact way, the word "one" on its own is not a metaphor.

Quote :

It's "perfectly fine", to be self-contradicting.
So "things" are both finite and infinite...and that's "fine".

You are equivocating.

Magnus Anderson wrote:

First. you defined the word "one" to imply finitude.

Then, you concluded that the concept of a single physical object that is infinite is non-sensical (i.e. that it is a logical contradiction.)

So far so good. I agree. The conclusion logically follows from the premise.

But now you're claiming that the statement is logically contradictory EVEN IF you do not define the word "one" the way you do (i.e. to imply finitude.)

You see, that's the problem.
The classic example of language abuse.

It's called EQUIVOCATION.

Basically, all you're doing now is producing noise in order to distract.

Magnus Anderson wrote:

Quote :

So, every time it is used, it is literal.

Words can be used literally or figuratively.

For example, I can use the word "lion" to mean a wild animal or I can use it to mean a fierce warrior.
The second use would be an example of a metaphorical use.

The word "lion" on its own is not a metaphor.
In the same exact way, the word "one" on its own is not a metaphor.

No shit Sherlock?
That was interesting.
Never thought of it that way.

Magnus Anderson wrote:

First. you defined the word "one" to imply finitude.

Then, you concluded that the concept of a single physical object that is infinite is non-sensical (i.e. that it is a logical contradiction.)

So far so good. I agree. The conclusion logically follows from the premise.

But now you're claiming that the statement is logically contradictory EVEN IF you do not define the word "one" the way you do (i.e. to imply finitude.)

Forget what I said...you can't understand it, nor did you read it, so it doesn't matter.
It's not part of this conversation.
We are learning from you, now, how to use language conventionally.

We now know that "one" is both finite and infinite - both and neither.
It all depends on how you feel about it, at any given moment is space/time, which does not characterize you yet you exist within it.

And I am autistic and insane....

Quote :

No shit Sherlock?
That was interesting.
Never thought of it that way.

Unfortunately, it must be said.
It has to be said because you keep saying nonsensical things such as "words are metaphors".

Quote :

Forget what I said...you can't understand it, nor did you read it, so it doesn't matter.

You're too caught up in the idea that you know and understand everything.

Words are not metaphors...got it.
They are literal.
So "one" literally is a one.

One is literally both infinite and finite.

I am "full of myself"....indeed.
You are the avenger.
Focus is indifference, remember?

Quote :

Words are not metaphors...got it.
They are literal.
So "one" literally is a one.

You're blurring the distinction between the concept of literal and the concept of figurative.

I am...it is I who is doing it. Like it is I who is insane and autistic.

"One" is literally a singularity.
Both infinite and finite.
Like "human" is literally not dependent on space/time, and yet within it.
It is independent from space/time - and Heidegger is also insane, and autistic.

It seems you are conventionally speaking neither autistic nor insane. You are part of the conventional.

And the word 'human" is literally a human.
But then in Greek it is anthropos...so if it is literally human it cannot be literally anthropos at the same time.
So, human is literally a human, yet anthropos is figuratively a human...like "one", the word itself, the letters....are literally a "singularity".
So if anyone asks, "show me a one" you can write the word down on paper and show them.
"Here is a one".
Case closed.

Similarly....if you write down "unicorn" you can prove unicorns actually exist.
"I have never seen one"
Scribble it down on paper - preferably in English - and show the infidels.
"There!!! See it now? A literal unicorn"
Case closed.