Infiniti Eurosport St950 Elliptical

What, if any, beyond the universe?

A theological explanation would be the simplest: "everything" was created by God E 'Being that E' by definition, outside of time and space in an eternal present, infinite and unchanging. L ' Being is, non-being is not, says Parmenides denying anything, as not to be; q uindi there only being infinite and immutable.

remains to explain the progress, or what it looks like becoming, ie the passage of time and the transformation of things, incompatible with the static nature of being, as it requires a transition from non-being, such as death.

Even Plato had raised the issue and, in contrast to Parmenides, it makes a difference, because the ideas in 'supercelestial are immutable and therefore eternal, while the world of things, simplifying and forcing a bit 'a' modern expression, is a blurry hologram dell'iperuranio, materialized by the Demiurge, who is not a creator, but is the power to order.

So God, being immutable, it could not intervene in the real world forever proud, but we note that all major religions base their beliefs on 'God's intervention, both in the creation of the cosmos in our lives of all days.

dogmatically accepted that God is infinite and unchanging, but also very powerful. "so willed there where you can do what you want, and ask no more" (Dante Inf. Part III and V)

I do not like dogmas, and at risk of going to hell, I still "asking".

The current cosmological theories, which try to reconcile quantum mechanics and general relativity explains the origin of the universe as a fluctuation from the vacuum state.

The fluctuation has resulted in the exploding singularity, the Big Bang, then leads to the expansion of the universe, billions of years after the birth of the solar system.

With the theory of evolution explains the appearance of life and of 'man on Earth. In other words: ex nihilo omnia . The "it" was born from "nothing" to a random fluctuation of the vacuum.

So a logical, scientific and perfect atheist. Problem solved? Absolutely not.

The Nothing is the obsession and the nightmare of philosophical thought, from Aristotle to Plotinus to Augustine, Cusano to Hegel to Heidegger, Sartre, Kierkegaard writes: " Despair is the terror of emptiness, of being nothing more than nothing. " , Leonardo da Vinci : " Infralle great things among us who are , the being of nothing is tremendous " (Atlantic code) and Leopardi: " In sum, the principle of things, and God himself, is nothing " . (Zibaldone).

a bit 'all the philosophers, in one way or another, have faced the problem of nothingness.

Even modern science, continues to question whether and on what is "nothing", for two reasons: because the scientific thought is related to philosophy and to understand why the physical world is necessary to know the properties of the vacuum.

The quantum vacuum is not empty, because the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, is an ocean in constant agitation, during which particles and antiparticles arise and annihilate immediately. It 's a vacuum "medium void", but not the "nihil".

So the universe is born from "nothing" but something that already existed in the "empty" quantum.

But because "there is" the void "medium void"?

Ubi veritas?
Q uaeritur!

Motorola Phone Tools 4.2.1.a.

The thought of thinking and thinking.

The Relevance of Gentile.

"the reality is unthinkable except in relation coll'attività thinking that is unthinkable"

It follows that thinking is essentially a distinction between activities and abstract thinking and concrete thinking, thinking thinking, not being act, is abstract. concrete thinking is the thinking in place.

Some thoughts.

thinking in action is my ego, is self-consciousness of 'I existing ego subject, I think therefore I am, is the true reality, not reality mediated by the senses, as Schopenhauer says, is a concrete thought , a real thought and thought can be summarized in the act of thinking, being, reality, subject and object. The act of thinking is a dynamic and therefore the transitional decade in thinking that thought is abstract and static.

But the thought thought where does it go? To answer

this question, must be sought in biological science: the thought thought up by the brain is collected in LTM (long-term memory). Exemplifying with hardware terminology, we can say of thinking and that thought is the ram on 'hard disk. It often happens to reopen old files, that is designed to resume thoughts that are in the MLT and from this moment, the thought back thought to be in place and then thought it is still thought to create such a loop, rather than a dialectic between thinking and thought .

Falling from the 'supercelestial "pure thought to the empirical world of MLT is a looming problem does not matter: who assures us that information, stored in it, have not deteriorated like an old floppy?

thought thought brought to light is the original or a copy of it faded and display errors?

If we think that damage to the hippocampus, (MP all'encoding of new memories), with the cortical areas close to it and cause amnesia when we consider that there is a branch of physics that studies the Theory of Errors, (it is a part pretty boring, so I avoid going into detail, but basically, in short, says that each measurement or reading to a certain error, which may be due to the instrument with which you are measuring, bias, or due to the operator, random error), whatever, I'm afraid I have to answer that in many cases, the reading of thoughts fedelmante thought does not correspond to 'the original.

In light of these considerations, I think the current concept of Gentile is fairly centered.

Nothing exists except act in which it is thought.

And I would add: there is nothing concrete, that is really true, if not in the act in which it is thought, everything else is an approximation.

So there is a bug creeping relativism of jeopardizing our res cogitans?

Marcello

Why

Fleetwood Niagra Popup

Because the Qur'an has founded a theology opposed to that of the Bible and

the Koran, he founded a theology BibbiaL'anticipazione opposite to that of the book 'is not the same God, is not the same man' Charles PanellaTestata: The FoglioData: May 16 2009Pagina: 9Autore: Carlo Panella - Nicoletta TiliacosTitolo: "The Koran Estate - Let us not be enchanted by the Arabian Nights and even by Tariq Ramadan " http://www.informazionecorretta.com/main.php?mediaId=8&sez=120&id=29443

Cover Letter For Visual Stylist

From Marco De Turris

Friday 7 November 2008
THE RIGHT OF CULTURE IN ITALY
often happens in Italy to hear quite critical judgments about the "right culture" and to support its substantial non-existent or at least inferior to the so-called "cultural left" of Marxist-progressista.Questo real ideological bias has found its ultimate expression in a statement of Norberto Bobbio, the intellectual left, but with so-called liberal left-wing sympathies, who said and wrote that there is a culture of destra.E 'easy to refute such claims as the result of ignorance or bad faith. The great international culture of the contemporary world is usually not a socialist or Marxist. Remaining to Italy in the twentieth century only the three largest Italian philosophers, Croce, Gentile and Evola, all three were right, as it was the greatest economist of the right ever of our country, the liberal and royalist Luigi Einaudi. The major Italian writers active in the nineteenth century Pirandallo, Svevo, D'Annunzio, were all supporters of fascism, as well as famous people operating in various fields, from Marconi to Mascagni. An exhaustive list of illustrious authors classified in one of the many souls of the "right", be it liberal, conservative, national, traditional and so on., It would be too long for this site, and would not even be complete. Suffice it to say that the intellectual richness of the past centuries Italy visibly contrasts with the low average level of the historical period of the last 60 years, culturally dominated by the idea left. The reason for this paradox is that the "right" there are neither men nor the ideas and ideals, but the means and opportunity to express them. In Italy cultural power for decades is being monopolized by the Marxist left, both in universities and publishers, both in journalism (Marcello Veneziani wrote a book about it, "The Eskimo in the newsroom," explaining how journalists of left have obtained a considerable degree of autonomy and independence before its publishers themselves, be reduced to enable it to perform its propaganda), and even in apparently less important areas such as cinema and music. This proper use of places of power of culture is probably the result of two main causes. The first is the implementation by the PCI-PDS of a clear strategy, which had already been outlined by Gramsci and explicitly theorized that the establishment of a "hegemony" (this is the specific terms used) by the Marxists in cultural field, in order to inculcate its principles to society. It 's so happened that the left parties used money, men, pressure instruments of all kinds, to be able to let their representatives and supporters of cultural institutions of all levels, universities nursery schools, publishing houses with those recordings. In this, their work was much favored by the unions of the Triple Alliance (CGIL, CISL and UIL), capable of gaining the consent of a wide range of teachers and professors universitari.La second reason is that the above operation, carried out based on a real strategy, adequately funded and well guided from above, has not been matched by any of the rights adequate replication: conservative Catholics, liberals, MSI occurred before the split to unity Marxist ideological opponent. In addition, the Catholic Christian Democrats, despite having governed Italy for almost 50 years, did not understand really the importance of culture in its political work, while liberals and MSI, too weak the first, definitely excluded the latter, they could not with their own efforts to respond to the systematic campaign of employment and promotion of the cultural left marxista.Il result is that the abundance of talent and ideas of the Right has not paid adequate visibility, while a fundamental monotony and poverty of the conflict has left a very wide spread of their beliefs. To bring a case in point, a work regarded as the greatest Italian novel of the twentieth century, "The Leopard" by Tomasi di Lampedusa, a real masterpiece imbued with the spirit conservative monarchist and Catholic, he found, while its author was alive, only one publisher willing to publish it. When it was finally published, it was the Press, the publisher of the left par excellence, who tried to passed off as a text content rivoluzionario.Accade so, even today, that certain professions such as university professors or journalists, are much more easy to follow for those who profess the left, which is not an apolitical, and are often closed to those who stated views on the right. Inside there are strong guilds of faith "progressive", which tend to aggregate members of their own ideas and to exclude the problem posed altri.Il this situation is not only of justice, being such a profoundly unjust discrimination, but also of politics, as the Italian left controls the media and cultural power disproportionate to help spread the ideas of the political party of reference.
Posted by Marco De Turris at 21:35

Is It Illegal To Make A Tokidoki Bag

The Church and communism

http://www.cesnur.org/2009/mi_1989.htm

Pokemon Sapphire Online Playr

A friend asked me ... Nietzsche still

justice and freedom?
Strict application of the law always respects the canon of freedom? Here
(Blog pibond), I wrote something about it.
someone among your friends, share with me the idea that the combination of law and justice should relate only to the harmful actions committed by individuals, while any action, regardless of actual damages must first be examined in terms of individual freedom and responsibility?
Freedom and Responsibility is a combination that concerns the conscience of the person before the exercise of their rights and in particular those inalienable and immutable as that of living freely.

http://pibond.blogspot.com/2009/05/diritto-e-giustizia-o-liberta-e.html

Inexpensive 20 Foot Sail Boats

A Palestinian misunderstood

From the Giornale del 04/30/2009
Daniele Abbiati

"" The best compliment that of Nietzsche (but not to Nietzsche) is Georg Simmel and is dated October 23, 1897. "There is nothing easier than" refute "Nietzsche. The metamorphosis speculative leaps in its development, the violent fantasies that he applies the story, the logical contradictions of his world view are so obvious as to ensure that the scientific issue against him can not all be to demonstrate his errors, but to explain why, despite these errors, he was able to elicit such profound impression not only among those who are fond of the literary fashions or love the beautiful shape. "
The strength of the author would be to charm rather than "literary" of his work, in spite of his being a philosopher himself. The account appears in the review essay by Ferdinand Tönnies The cult of Nietzsche. In fact, a true "cult" had blossomed throughout Europe, around the devastated poor body and mind of the father of Superman who died there in three years. With the catastrophe in Turin in January 1888 was the curtain fell on the person of Nietzsche, but he had raised another, much heavier, on Nietzsche's master-guru. "Psychopathological phenomenon," "bourgeois," "aristocratic," "theory of capitalism ',' social democratic ',' anarchist ',' evolutionary 'labels applicategli within five to six years are many, and all wrong to some extent, extensions.
And still on the corpus of Nietzsche's still the stigma of those and other misappropriations. Revised e. .. sister Elisabeth in the wrong key material (and ethically) proactive and reactionary, Our endured the Nazi Anschluss by the delusion that if a medal pinned to his chest as intellectual, ignoring or pretending to ignore, among other things, repeatedly stated his anti-Semitism. Filtered by the pre-and post-twentieth-century disasters Third Reich, Nietzsche's nihilistic ectoplasm remained only recently been criticized papal, while his aesthetic, his humanism, his enlightenment are confined specialized studies in the closet of ... ... ""

do not agree in considering that of Georg Simmel a compliment, let alone that "there is nothing easier than" refute "Nietzsche".
Nietzsche is not to be refuted, but it is Nietzsche himself who rejects everything and everyone.
It 'clear that Simmel, being the predominant sociological interest in him, can not, despite having undergone a certain charm, share the philosophy of Nietzsche.

I'm sorry that you incur more error to consider Nietzsche an anti-Semite, in the sense of racism. Our anti-Semitic as anti-Christian, as anti-metaphysical, as anticredente: in essence, is against everything that is represented by 5000 years of man-made superstructures. Nihilism of Our
not an end in itself, destroyed everything to start a new era for the Man, how can we call a nihilist who constantly invokes the will to power?
God is dead, but the man died waiting for the man transvaluation: the superman or maybe it's better to say 's "Superman." Any attempt to subdue, as has been done, new philosophical, political or social does not do justice to his thought, certainly in the original history of philosophy.
Marcello