[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature


View post   

File: 181 KB, 452x572, hegel.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13744555 No.13744555 [Reply] [Original]

how old were you when you finally realised that all that dialetic bullshit and pure becoming and pure being was to establish that 0 to the 0th power = 1

>> No.13744570
File: 178 KB, 840x767, 1565724357317.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13744570

>>13744555

>> No.13744573

>>13744570
please dont post vague memes in my thread without my permission

>> No.13744724

>>13744555
>tfw u are too much of a brainlet for Hegel

I just wanna learn about phenomenology!!!!!!!!!

>> No.13744744

>>13744555
>pure becoming and pure being was to establish that 0 to the 0th power = 1
OK, can someone explain what is this? I am a STEMfag, and I don't know whether is this memeing or seriously someone said big philosophical implication on that

>> No.13744752
File: 78 KB, 396x385, american shiva airburst.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13744752

>>13744744
https://ianwrightsite.wordpress.com/2018/11/24/hegelian-contradiction-and-the-prime-numbers-part-1/

thank you based hegel

>> No.13744754
File: 742 KB, 3072x2373, The_Systematic_Dialectic_of_the_Standard_Linear-Algebraic_Mathematical_Objects_,_1_,_25AUG2016.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13744754

>he's still on dialectical arithmetic

>> No.13744760
File: 7 KB, 250x241, annoyed pepe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13744760

>>13744754
schizoposter

>> No.13744769
File: 492 KB, 1000x1396, 41032_1000.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13744769

Damascius already confronted this.
The ascension to the Ineffable Nothingness is twofold, reverting to the One. It's as if 0 is an upward emanation of himself (the One) eternally transcending himself; and this 'absolute beyond: is what produces Being/Nous.
The Father is his own Son.

>> No.13744778
File: 17 KB, 250x238, the absolute cheek.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13744778

>>13744769
yeah well the shiva sutras expounded on that before that fag, and in a much more succinct and erudite way

FUCK damascuiusics, praise hinduism ok

>> No.13744812
File: 677 KB, 1400x2048, Dqgq7WNWoAAKW0D.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13744812

>>13744778
See that picture?
Πρωτογόνου βασιλέως αἰδοίου∙ τῶι δ’ ἄρα πάντες ἀθάνατοι προσέφυν μάkαρες θεοὶ ἠδ̣ὲ θέαιναι kαὶ ποταμοὶ kαὶ kρῆναι ἐπήρατιο ἄλλα τε πάντα , ἅ̣σσα τότ’ ἦγγεγαῶτ ’ , αὐτὸς δ’ ἄρα μοῦνος ἔγεντο.

>> No.13744869

>>13744752
They should stuck in the Category theory and Topos theory. I've read some article did some attempt to convert hegel's logic in Heyting algebra in Sierpinski topos. I think that is right thing to do... although principle of charity is hugely implied.
But this... why he gives any meaning on Zeta function? Why did he specifically choose Riemann zeta function? I feel it has very naive reason. indulging in brilliant feats of explaining away. There's some people out there finding zeta functions in the Ergodicity, which is new field, can he tell how should they do in this theory? Although nobody can say it is wrong, that same reason become why is this wrong.
He did a minor mistake too. "Riemann knew there are an infinite number of zeros." No he didn't. Hardy proved it. If you want to imply trivial zeros then say about it. And what is the philosophical implication on trivial zeros? He really should do this on LaTeX, btw.
This part 1(and so implies part 2) just looks like texas sharpshooter. I don't like it.

>> No.13744993
File: 3.62 MB, 1960x2376, Orpheus_Piazza_della_Vittoria_MAR_Palermo_NI2287.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13744993

>>13744812
>>13744778
>First-born king, the reverend one; and upon him all the immortals grew, blessed gods and goddesses and rivers and lovely springs and everything else that had then been born; and he himself became the sole One.

>> No.13746105
File: 163 KB, 400x292, h1.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13746105

based thread

>> No.13746131

>>13744744
It's a shitty way of saying that the negation of a negation results in something concrete (i.e. determinate negation)