[TROM1] postulates - complementary and otherwise

Theta Quest metaperl.fz101 at gmail.com
Tue Jan 15 09:08:27 UTC 2008


p.4 of the PDF says:

1.
The purpose of bringing an effect into existence is to make it known.
2.
The purpose of taking an effect out of existence is to make it not-known.
3.
The purpose of knowing is to know.
4.
The purpose of not-knowing is to not know.

Thus, 1 & 3 and 2 & 4 are complementary postulates. They enhance affinity.
Thus, 1 & 4 and 2 & 3 are conflicting postulates. They lower affinity.


My comments:

1 - dont think I am trying to shoot TROM down. I'm just having
problems understanding what is said and need to be certain of what i
am reading.
2 - the commentary says "1 & 3 and 2 & 4 are complementary
postulates." I dont think any of 1-4 are postulates. They appear to be
statements about the purpose of life's abilities. a postulate is a
causative consideration. I dont see any causative considerations in
1-4.
3 - could someone give an example of how complementary postulates
enhance affinity while conflicting ones lower affinity?


More information about the Trom mailing list