6 Stringed Fingers
EditablePoly 1
marduk1507 said:Given that 6 is a Nietzschean, Im somewhat surprised by his answer. Ive always viewed that line along the line of Platos cave - you need something negative to actually know anything (but its not a ballance), you need to leave the cave and see the light, but before you see the LIGHT, you must get used to it, so first you look at the shadows of things cast by the LIGHT, then at the things themselves, and then you can raise you head towards the LIGHT. So, the negative platonism is in this, negative as the source of positive experience (very roughly). But then theres another question - a question that had its peak in Heideggers "why is there Being at all, rather than Nothing?" Isnt the dark side actually the foundation of the real?
It is not the nothingness that is the foundation of the real, but the unreal. It's the same with the birth of matter through the creation of the same amount of antimatter. And that brings about an idea about the negative platonism. The shadow isn't really the negative to the positive light, the negative would be something along the line of un-light, something that's not only the lack of light, but the annihilation of it. And I'm not sure what it bring to the situation. It might be similar to analyzing the positive infinite by starting to count from the negative infinite. It simply cannot be done by humans, and thus negative as the source of positive experience is impossible.
A: Psychology may not be so over-complicated after observing some human relationships, but the over-complication of those psyches maybe the result of over-complication of psychology in turn. That forms a cycle of over-complication of both psychology and human psyche.
Q: Nothing is black or white, but are the shades more black than white, or vice versa?