Date: Mar 17, 2013 8:05 AM
Author: fom
Subject: Re: Matheology § 224

On 3/17/2013 5:44 AM, WM wrote:
> On 17 Mrz., 11:19, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote:
>> On 3/17/2013 4:13 AM, WM wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

>>> On 17 Mrz., 08:18, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote:
>>>> On 3/16/2013 4:37 PM, WM wrote:
>>
>>>>> On 16 Mrz., 21:19, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> In potential infinity there is no necessary line except the last one.
>>>>>>> We know that with certainty from induction. Every found and fixed line
>>>>>>> n cannot be necessary, because the next line contains it.

>>
>>>>>> AS soon as something is identifies as a natural or a FIS of the set of
>>>>>> naturals, it has a successor. It cannot be either a natural nor a FIS of
>>>>>> the naturals without a successor. at least by any standard definition of
>>>>>> naturals.

>>
>>>>> As soon as a second becomes presence, it has a successor.
>>
>>>> And what fantasy is this?
>>
>>>> The successor to the present has existential form but
>>>> has not yet happened.

>>
>>>> That is not the Kantian aprioriticity of time.
>>
>>>> That is not the Hegelian becoming of the present.
>>
>>>> It is the unfounded object of unjustifiable belief.
>>
>>> It is the well known and established natural way how time passes and
>>> how the system of human actions in time goes off.

>>
>> It is the unfounded object of unjustifiable belief.-

>
> Then you should love it like "the Cartesian product of non-empty sets
> is non-empty".



I do!