Whatever is not as 'part, whole, equivalence, uniqueness, limit, link, sensation, influence, derivative, origin, condition, rule, intent, and fulfillment' is not unity.
2007-01-23 14:10:47 · 15 answers · asked by The Knowledge Server 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
YES YOU ARE RIGHT. THIS IS A THOUGHT PROVOKING QUESTION I HAVE NEVER SEEN.
2007-01-26 18:09:41 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Whatever is not as 'part, whole, equivalence, uniqueness, limit, link, sensation, influence, derivative, origin, condition, rule, intent, and fulfillment' does not raise questions. Are you stuck on repeat or what?
2007-01-24 01:54:40 · answer #2 · answered by emiliathered 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh my holy God. I have answered this question already. but since you soothe interest from me, i'll answer it again. It is a very intriguing question no doubt about it. And yes, it raises question as to what is the meaning of the question. It's kind of vague, thus brings forth equivocal meanings. Did you mean Whatever is not as 'part,whole,equivalent,unique,limited/limitless,linked,sensational,influential, original,conditional,ruling/ruled,intentional,and fulfilled'is not unity?
otherwise just basing on your question, you are using a fallacy of equivocation that definitely is unjustifiable, there is never a correct answer to it because it is already a false-reasoning question that demands different or equivocal meanings. I could say yes and no and i would still be wrong.
Anyway, it's so nice to keep seeing you here. everyday.
2007-01-28 18:51:27 · answer #3 · answered by oscar c 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
All these and more are the ingredients of unity. For unity implies life; and life, unity. And disunity depends on unity to be disunity.
All is inexorably tied to the one, which consists of the many, which again in turn is founded on the one.
2007-01-31 20:00:11 · answer #4 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Unity is an absence of all of listed above and many more which is not listed. To see it clearly you must be Divine Wise..That which listed represent parts of a unity, even whole as mentioned...Unity is all of it and if you embody all of it, paradoxically it initiates an absence of its details, only WHOLE remains....and there is no mortals know Whole.With embodiment of a Whole, Whole as God knowing itself through experience of its details..circle complete... well that Truth cannot be implemented outwardly it can be only individually understood. Any implementation outward of Divine wisdom may lead initiator to the Cross. It must belong only to beholder.HUMAN EXPERIENCING ITSELF BEING LOST IN DETAILS WHICH DICTATING HIM WHO HE IS, WITH LACK OF ABILITY TO SEE HIMSELF AS EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING... But, thanks, you are deep.
2007-01-23 23:04:41 · answer #5 · answered by Oleg B 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Only because you raised that question rhetorically as if to filter out who is patient enough to answer that.
2007-01-29 05:01:21 · answer #6 · answered by Gopal M 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Is orgasm sensation, condition, or fulfillment?
2007-01-23 23:24:59 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
no I don't think it raises questions. Your question encompasses all and anything short of that is nothing.
2007-01-29 20:27:06 · answer #8 · answered by lego 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes it might take awhile to sort out the answer
2007-01-23 22:21:31 · answer #9 · answered by undercovernudist 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not many and Who cares?
2007-01-31 18:38:23 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm sorry I still don't understand what you're asking.
2007-01-24 05:36:08 · answer #11 · answered by ghds 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋