[MD] Marsha's (s)OL

[Joseph Maurer]

On 10/17/09 11:40 AM, "Ham Priday" <hampday1 at verizon.net> wrote:

<snip>
The concept of "negation" is rooted in the precept that an absolute can only
create an "other" by denying some aspect of itself.  An analogy I use is
that of the mountain-climber who has ascended to the summit and can only
proceed by descent.  In other words, existence is "reductional" rather than
an "addition" to absolute Essence. As Cusa put it, the first principle is
the 'not-other' from which all otherness is negated.  Entities are therefore
'negates' estranged or separated from the primary source.
[Ham]:
 
> Absolute Essence is not an "experience"; it transcends experience.
> What you experience "in the presence of great beauty" is
> differentiated value.
 

Hi Ham and all,

Is there a real difference between ³Intellect² and ³will²?   Is the
difference one of function within the same reality?  As I ponder it, it
seems intellect will propose proposition after proposition until an
agreeable balance is reached that is recognized as truth. ³Negation² seems
to be a decision based on (?).  I negate in one place and agree in another
place.  Is Negation, then, only the attribute of the absolute. How do I ever
arrive at a truth by ³absolute negation² outside of creation?   I am not an
absolute.

Joe

> The concept of "negation" is rooted in the precept that an absolute can only
> create an "other" by denying some aspect of itself.  An analogy I use is
> that of the mountain-climber who has ascended to the summit and can only
> proceed by descent.  In other words, existence is "reductional" rather than
> an "addition" to absolute Essence.  As Cusa put it, the first principle is
> the 'not-other' from which all otherness is negated.  Entities are therefore
> 'negates' estranged or separated from the primary source.
> [Ham]:
>> Absolute Essence is not an "experience"; it transcends experience.
>> What you experience "in the presence of great beauty" is
>> differentiated value.