anomosmarxist

5 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by anomosmarxist 5y ago

   true, but also for some math isnt a model but a discoverable part of nature. depends on who is doing the philosophical arguing there. we dont know for sure, ironically because of godel? therefore its a true part of nature?
2. 2.▲
   by anomosmarxist 5y ago

   Godel is important, but his argument's extension to natural laws is a bit of a stretch, also that set of laws isnt really a logical axiomatic set. its more of a hodgepodge, an ever shifting discursive formation by which we are epistemo
3. 3.▲
   by anomosmarxist 5y ago

   here is a quote: "from the necessity of the divine nature must follow an infinite number of things in infinite ways-that is, all things which can fall within the sphere of infinite intellect"
4. 4.▲
   by anomosmarxist 5y ago

   here is a quote: "from the necessity of the divine nature must follow an infinite number of things in infinite ways-that is, all things which can fall within the sphere of infinite intellect"
5. 5.▲
   by anomosmarxist 5y ago

   so even this decent article is just a surface overview of a brilliant thinker and this reply chain continues such lack of attention towards careful reading and discussion of his text. instead we have everyone sounding off on their own concl
6. 6.▲
   by anomosmarxist 5y ago

   Ya, wtf. clearly this is a reply chain of intelligent people (?) but not a single post about the actual text. like tldr for spinoza, his writing is far beyond these grasping confusions which could be avoided if anyone cared to have an actua