An argument for intellegence

  • Thread starter Thread starter Matthias123
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Matthias123

Guest
Matter and form are to be proportioned if they are to come together as one thing. In addition the form is responsible for the proper accident. Therefore if one were to digress far enough, we would find that since the form is not determined to be some way by a prior cause, the first proportion cannot be caused by material necessity. Therefore there must be some intelligence formal cause producing these forms.
Click to expand...
 
The proportioned in this context, is the proportional superposition of matter and form in a singular ontological substance. What I am arguing is that proportions in substances are not due to material necessity, but ultimately have their origin in a first formal cause. If this is true, it would be reasonable to assert that the universe itself has a final cause. This would go to support the Strong anthropological principle (SAP)
 
Matthias123 said:
The proportioned in this context, is the proportional superposition of matter and form in a singular ontological substance. What I am arguing is that proportions in substances are not due to material necessity, but ultimately have their origin in a first formal cause. If this is true, it would be reasonable to assert that the universe itself has a final cause. This would go to support the Strong anthropological principle (SAP)
Click to expand...
I don’t think humanity knows enough about the nature of the subatomic to really offer anything but opinion on this.
 
An argument for intellegence

General rule: if you can’t spell it, you may not have it. 😉
 
Matthias123 said:
The proportioned in this context, is the proportional superposition of matter and form in a singular ontological substance. What I am arguing is that proportions in substances are not due to material necessity, but ultimately have their origin in a first formal cause. If this is true, it would be reasonable to assert that the universe itself has a final cause. This would go to support the Strong anthropological principle (SAP)
Click to expand...
Geez… And I thought that I was bad at making explanations clear. 😦
The “proportioned” in this context, is the proportional superposition of matter and form?] in a singular ontological substance. What I am arguing is that proportions in substances are not due to material necessity?], but ultimately have their origin in a first formal cause. If this is true, it would be reasonable to assert that the universe itself has a final cause. This would go to support the Strong anthropological principle (SAP)?]
Click to expand...
 
If it is of any help, the proportions of matter as well as the entire physical universe, is the result of the speed of light as is the reverse.

This is to say that if by whatever means, the speed of light were to suddenly double, the entire universe and everything within it would instantly double with it such as to result in no observable change.

This is all a part of the “theory of relativity”. That theory DOES presuppose an absolute relationship between all things and is theorized to be due to all things being of the same exact substance “aether” or “fabric of space” which in itself is NOT relative, but the base upon which relative existence rests.
 
Matthias123 said:
Are you familiar with hylomorphism?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hylomorphism_(Aristotelian
Click to expand...
It would help if you used the definition common to the day or at very least, denote which definition set you want to use BEFORE using them. 😃

Aristotle used words that got translated disregarding his conceptual mindset. This very often is what is done in etymology and leads to many confusions.

To Aristotle (or his translations), many words have different than today’s meanings.

“Form”, “Matter”, “Actuality”, Shape", “Potentiality”, all have conceptual meanings that differ from today’s use of those words.

In short… SPEAK ENGLISH!!

😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top