The Cosmic Trinity

Author: mustardness

Posts

Total: 37
MisterChris
MisterChris's avatar
Debates: 45
Posts: 2,897
5
10
11
MisterChris's avatar
MisterChris
5
10
11
Actually, the Cosmic Trinity is:

Ass, Grass, and Sledding Fast
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,255
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@MisterChris
The cosmic trinity is simply.....TIME...SPACE...MATTER.

Time and space do not require creation, whereas you would assume that matter did.

WTF "ego" has got to do with anything, I do not know.
simplybeourselves
simplybeourselves's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 129
0
2
6
simplybeourselves's avatar
simplybeourselves
0
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
The ego is, itself, extremely egotistical but I still don't see how denying the ego is an extremely egotistical thing for a person to do. I would say that it's not extremely egotistical to deny the ego. I would say it's egotistical to deny the ego. But I wouldn't say that it's extremely egotistical to deny the ego. I'd say it's extremely egotistical to either brag that one is completely without an ego and therefore superior  or brag that one is superior  because of one's ego.


zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,255
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@simplybeourselves
Yep.
simplybeourselves
simplybeourselves's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 129
0
2
6
simplybeourselves's avatar
simplybeourselves
0
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
Or it could be a cosmic twofold. 

Spacetime (or matter) and energy.

Or a comic onefold.

All is a form of: energy.

zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,255
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@simplybeourselves
Yep. That's the uncertainty of everything.

Nothing and something are both onefold I assume.

And the process required therein is another.

That's three

Or perhaps two

Or perhaps one.

Is ZERO actually possible?
simplybeourselves
simplybeourselves's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 129
0
2
6
simplybeourselves's avatar
simplybeourselves
0
2
6
I don't think that the concept of relative truth makes any sense. I think all truth is absolute. 

I don't think lies are anything metaphysically fundamental.  I think that lies are *ethically* fundamental. Although, they're not the most ethically fundamental thing. To me the most ethically fundamental thing is that suffering is essentially bad.

I agree absolute truth is very fundamental. But I see 'absolute truth' as just synonymous with plain old 'truth'.

I think believing in subjective truth is deeply confused.

Relative truth ..... well, I can only make sense of it if it refers to truths relative to whatever those truths refer to. But that even applies to absolute truth and I think that's a completely trivial sense of relative.  So, again, I don't think that there's any meaningful way in which truth is relative. So I'm just going to go ahead and say truth is necessarily absolute. Otherwise I'm referring to something meaningless and thereby not really referring to anything at all.

So, I think truth is absolute. But I don't think it's the most fundamental truth that truth is absolute. I think that existence exists is at least as fundamental. I think that consciousness is real is at least as fundamental. There are a few fundamentals. I don't think it's three. I think that there are many fundamental expressions that we can't really specifically innumerate because there are many ways to put things. But there are certainly ways to put things that are incoherent or meaningless. And I don't think that incoherent or meaningless truths belong in the category of the most fundamental truths of existence.