[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]

/lit/ - Literature

Search:


View post   

>> No.22684981 [View]
File: 38 KB, 647x1000, IMG_3444.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22684981

Why don’t the same arguments he used to show limit and infinity are prior to Being apply to the henads? And how are the henads enumerable if there’s no infinitude and limit before them? I don’t think he explicitly said anywhere that limit and infinity were posterior to he henads, but if they were prior, then surely Being would be also, so they shouldn’t be enumerable and they shouldn’t have infinite potency.

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]