Karl

It is our conceptual view of causality. The causality is an absolute, things by their nature follow trajectories, we term one of these causalities as Gravity. We call the Sun a star. It doesn't mean that stars don't exist, but we are categorising what we see to make sense of the universe. I agree that more work needs doing. This is where I was going with Brian, but it was just turning fractious. I blame myself for that.

All living things have a nature, that nature is to operate in the universe relative the other things. We have free will, that is our nature.

There is no 'gravitation constant rule' as an absolute. This is a man made conception of the actions/nature of objects.

Yet numbers are what they are. A is A.

That you must know what you read, hear and think. Words are conceptual.

To 'butt in'. Time and space are relative only to man. They describe causality as understood by the human mind. Without human conception then causality continues, but the relation disappears. An expansive, or shrinking universe is causality in action. Causality is the result of entities with particular natures (therefore identities) acting on each other.

Welcome HS. It's far more open minded here and you will find all kinds of help for practices, or an open forum to question those practices.

That's why the Trivium begins with a comprehensive understanding of grammar. Where am I ? How do I know it ? What should I do ? Grammar, logic, rhetoric. Input, processing, output

I'm afraid of death even though I accept that it will and must happen. I have no belief in any after life, I know dead is dead.

But this isn't what it's about. These jobs aren't worthless to the Mexicans, or for someone unable to get any job. People move from countries where the living standard is worse to where it is better. Perhaps the Mexicans hope to bring their sons and daughters up to be educated in the US and to get better jobs. The reason US citizens don't take these jobs is that the opportunity cost is too high. They are better educated and connected, they speak the language fluently and understand the culture. To take one of these low paying jobs would reduce the opportunity to take a higher paying one. These jobs either have to be done by someone or the service will be transported to another country. A Mexican Apple picker in Vermont would pick Apples in Mexico and export them to the US whilst the Vermont orchard owner would shut down his business and take it to Mexico. You know, we got on just fine before minimum wages. We got on the earning ladder where we could and worked our way up by gaining experience and skills that we could take on to new employers and sell at a higher rate. It's hard to get your first job because you have no history and employers must take a higher risk. The higher the risk, the less likely they are to take someone on even at minimum wage. My Grandad used to say that second class driving was better than first class walking. In other words it's better to get a job than not.

All jobs are viable provided the hirer and employer agree on the terms of trade. What is being shown here is that the minimum wage is too high. There could be many more jobs created if the minimum wage was abolished. What has been created is a black market just as happened in communist Russia. When capitalism is crowded out by state it has to go underground to survive. Russian communism only survived as long as it did because of that black market which is why Governments tend to turn a blind eye to what's going on. A black market tells you that state oppression is evident. A disparity between the rules and practicality. Without these low paid Mexicans your economy would be closer to collapse. So not only are these jobs viable, but they are a necessity. The alternative is that you import the fruits of this labour, or you lose the service that is provided completely. That's what happened to cinema usherettes, receptionists, telephonists, petrol station attendants, bank tellers and more recently till operators. Instead of getting the gas pumped whilst you sit in your car and have the oil checked, water topped up and windshield cleaned-now you are forced to pump the gas yourself, dispense with the other services then stand at a kiosk to pay. You no longer get shown your seat in a cinema so you bump about in the dark.

I don't think that is quite that. I get the sense of nominalism.

A thing is a thing, things are what they are and not something else. There aren't 'both' A's there is one A that is A. Are you denying 1 + 1= 2 ? Do you assume that 1 might represent another number entirely ? Is ever letter you have written have no clear meaning and therefore a completely random sentence that I interpret by chance ? By some kind of transmitted cipher ? Or that you never wrote it and I'm just imagining the writing means something ?

Bye Bye EU banking system......all this money printing has eventually landed on European shores. At the same time Bitish property speculators stage a run to get their money back and find the doors locked. One has remained open but given its investors a 17% hair cut. US is hovering on the edge. They are the monetary super volcano. This time the ripples from Brexit might well set it off.

Turtles Jim, but not as we know them.

Someone will have to interpret that for me. I'm struggling to get a sense of your argument.

You are missing the point. Even the sentence that makes no sense is an absolute statement. A is A. You cannot avoid it because you depend on it.

You see the problem with your statement IS that you are saying that your statement IS correct, that it IS absolute, that A is A. You have to accept the premise A is A in any statement, otherwise you are saying that your statement is nonsense.

"It may be true for you but not for me" which is usually a relativist argument against God, which is quite trippy.

Any multiverse would also be part of the universe, but multiverses are only theories as are extra dimensions. So far nature has never proven quite so convoluted, only the mind of man has envisaged heaven, hell, multiple spiritual realms and a host of gods and mythical creatures. The universe appears to be spectacularly free from them so far.

It may well have a limit of expansion doesn't change anything. Infinity is not possible, it's a useful mathematical expression when solving equations. Infinity means a number larger than ANY specific quantity. This means no specific quantity. That would be a quantity without identity. Infinity denotes potentiality which is why it's useful I'm mathematics. However, potentiality is different from actuality. It is possible to subdivide the universe into ever smaller pieces and these are potentially infinite, but, however many pieces the universe is subdivided into, that is the true number. Potentiality may well spread ahead, but reality demands an actual number at whatever point that has been reached in that subdivision. That is why the universe is boundless but finite.

Have we found that to be the case ? No.

Depends of what the inevitable thing is and the current mindset of the person. If you are in supreme pain, or you have no more strength then it's more likely that you will just surrender.

In a sense. If you look back in history it all began short of the beginning of the 20ty century when big company owners began to lobby for protectionism. They said it was about efficiency and that the competition were wasting resource by duplicating effort. That was really the beginning of the end for Laissez Faire in the USA and led to a corresponding rise in government and cronyism-which included unions. During the 1st world war this cronyism accelerated and then went into over drive around 1920. This was the beginning of deliberate monetary expansion. By this time the world had abandoned the Gold standard in full or part and instituted a phoney gold standard (Bretton Woods). By 1971 the USA was broke as cronyism had turned a once great nation producing brilliant products into a nation of producers who couldn't care less what they turned out. Taxes had risen as money spent on subsidies, wars, welfare schemes and space exploration ballooned. In order to keep printing and spending they threw Bretton Woods in the bin.

Then it would equally be part of the universe. :-)