Evangelicalhumanist,<<>>That probably needs a little clarification, as I doubt everybody will get it.<<
When I say we deny transcendance, what I mean is that we believe that we are part of the All, and the All is part of us.<<
You've lost me already. Let's go back to "deny transcendence". I don't do anything that I know of called "deny transcendence". What the heck is transcendence anyway. OK I'll look it up in the online dictionary:
tran·scend·ence
/ˌtran(t)ˈsendəns/
noun
noun:
transcendence; plural noun:
transcendences; noun:
transcendency
existence or experience beyond the normal or physical level
I can't get any sense out of that alleged definition of "transcendence". I say that because it's obvious to me that we could not have possibly learned to use the word "beyond" so that it could make any sense to say "beyond the normal or physical level". We could only have learned to use the preposition "beyond" from and only from hearing cases of usage by other people saying or writing "X is beyond Y" where X and Y were within the normal or physical level. So we can only interpret
"X is beyond Y"
as equivalent to
"X, which is within the normal or physical level, is beyond Y, which is also within the normal or physical level".
Therefore when they say
"beyond the physical level"
if one attempted to make any sense of that, you'd come up with:
"X, which is within the normal or physical level, is beyond the normal or physical level, which is also within the normal or physical level".
That's gobbledygook and contradictory. You can't use "beyond" in a way that it could not possibly have been learned to be used in. It may SEEM like you can, but if you'll put a little thought to it, you'll see that it can't make any sense. The lexicographers didn't pick up on that. But that alleged definition of "transcendence cannot make any sense.
So what do you think you're claiming to deny when you speak of "denying transcendence"? I can't see that you're denying anything at all.
Now when you say "part of the All, and the All is part of us", what the heck do you think that means? What do you think you mean by capitalized "All"? Back to the dictionary
all
/ôl/
predeterminer · determiner · pronoun
determiner:
all; pronoun:
all
- used to refer to the whole quantity or extent of a particular group or thing.
- all (in games) used after a number to indicate an equal score.
"after extra time it was still two all"
Evangelicalhumanist,<<>>We are the same substance, although each of us exists in our own subset of the All -- though still connected by our kinship to the rest. To deny the "spirituality" of the All is to say nothing more than that there is no "separate stuff" that is not part of the All. And to deny the "personality" of the All is not to deny personality per se, but to insist that personality is merely a feature of some parts of the All, where the all permits it to emerge -- as, for example, in a brain. The All functions without guidance, with personality, but parts of the All can intentionally move the All.<<<
My, oh, my! I'm sorry, but that makes no sense to me. You may think you're speaking of something but I am unable to believe you are.
How can you say I "deny" what makes no sense to me? Tell me what you think I deny, and if you do, please speak so that I can understand, or else define your terms as you go. Thanks.
