Is there paradox?
Seremonia
What is the nature of paradox? Paradox consists more than one of something. And something is function. What we perceive as an existence, actually it’s not an existence, in the sense that what we perceive is merely functions.
If there is paradox then there must be the two of functions. These functions, one to another are functioning within two possibilities:
- Both functions are functioning without distance, in the sense, each of functions are running at the same placement. It’s like saying “me and myself”. In the sense that we can perceive the sameness in between both at any different point of views. If that so, then there is no paradox.
- Both functions are functioning within distance, in the sense, each of functions are running at different placement. In the sense that we can perceive the differences in between both at different point of views. But it’s not paradox, since both are working at different placement.
- An example: when we were watching an advertisement on television, and there were two images at the same place, it doesn’t have to be considered there was paradox. It just an assertion that “both images” were displayed at the same place but at different time (but we can’t perceive it, our understanding notify it). Meaning, there is a distance (gap, switching from one image replacing another image quickly) in between both images, therefore this is not a paradox.
If there is paradox, then there must be:
- Both functions are running at the same placement, there is no separation on what is pointed as paradox.
By saying that I am good and I am evil, it’s not paradox, since both qualities are running at different placement. I prefer to understand paradox as possibilities, since (what we consider as) paradox is just different placement of something.
The problem, is that we don’t know how to locate the different placement. But once, we can find the different placement of working functions (to be considered as paradox), then we can perceive it as different actualization of possibilities.
By asserting “this is paradox” it’s the same as saying “there is the same placement of different functions”, which is impossible. Remember that, i am referring existence in this case with “functions”, since what we perceive as existence is merely functions of particles, and a particles is function of another particles. (and i am not going into debate about what is this before current function, but i just want to assert that at least “if we perceive paradox” then it has relation with functions).
_____
Is there paradox? There is no paradox, but there is only different qualities. We just have to see from different point of view, and see if there are different placement (to make sure it’s not a paradox).
But yes, again this term is generally misused, by asserting there is paradox just because we are perceiving differences from the same thing, which it’s not paradox, since both are coming from one thing but actualized at different placement (we just don’t aware of it, we just don’t understand “what paradox is”).
_____
Affirming there is paradox, it’s just to assert that we have opposite qualities, but it doesn’t have to be considered there is conflict one to another.
