Philology and esoterica: scribblings, ravings and mutterings.
Boundaries imply, at the least, our ability to imagine the definition of unboundedness. Next, our willingness to consider the possibility of unboundedness. Perhaps they also imply the _actual_ possibility of unboundedness. Beyond that, I would say that I can see only boundaries, but of so many different types that they form a class of "boundedness" that implies its opposite pole of "unboundedness," being that we exist in a world that is not absolute.
What do you see as the essential difference between those first three implications? And why would the existence of a class imply an opposite to that class if the world is not absolute?
Post a Comment