Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Topics - JHuber

Pages: [1] 2
1
Justifications / The Meanings of Farther
« on: March 20, 2014, 04:02:29 PM »
It is interesting and important to remind everyone the different meanings of farther.
 
The first is, of course, proximity.  One can be farther away than someone else. 
The second is from procedure.  One can move farther along in a process. 
The third is from temperment.  One who is upset is farther away than one who is content; or, in negotiations,  two parties can become farther apart in agreement. 
The fourth is from family tree.  A cousin is farther away than a sibling, or dogs are more distantly related, farther, to humans than apes. 

Of course, the same definitions (but oppositely) hold for closer which is the antonym of farther. 

The point of posting this here is that the term farther, which is a relative term, isn't only about proximity.  There are more to relations than proximity or family. 

2
Purposes / The Solution To World Peace
« on: September 26, 2013, 10:19:51 PM »
These are the three reasons why the Subjects and Relations system is the solution to world peace.

1) It contains the definition of love. 
Love is extreme empathy.  In games and sports the opponent is antipathetic.  Their actions cause hate yet outside of the game their is no hate.  It is the antipathy that causes hate.  Therefore hate is extreme antipathy.  Since love is the opposite of hate and hate is extreme antipathy, love is extreme empathy.  It doesn't say that in religious literature.  If religious literature are the word of God and they neglected to define love, then love isn't technically part of their religions.  This discredits their integrity. The definition of love isn't in atheistic literature either.

2) It contains right and wrong.
Right and wrong are defined using the concept of extrinsic subjects.  If a subject is within an extrinsic subject it is right, if not it is wrong.  The concept of extrinsic subjects isn't in religious books either.  Furthermore, it would be awkward to include it.  To discuss the concept of extrinsic subjects within a religious context would negate the authority of God.

3) It conforms with evolution.
To understand that we are all subjects and we all have relatives explains why we are here.  This applies not only to humans but to all other animals and plants as well.  It is the system of subjects and relations, as well as happiness, that created us.  An omnipotent being is therefore unnecessary.  The issue of creationism and evolution is therefore not necessary.

As the world struggles with extreme tensions because of worldview systems, terrorists are only protecting what they believe is right, this alternative system would vaporize that tension.  People fight for their beliefs but they won't fight for a discredited belief.

There is one more point I'd like to make here.  Not only is the Subjects and Relations system the solution to world peace, it is also the only solution to world peace that is possible.  The words subjects and relations have the highest scope of all words.  There are no other words in language capable of creating a "higher" system.   

3
Justifications / The Argument
« on: January 20, 2013, 10:36:23 PM »
This is my argument in 100 words or less.

Mathematics and engineering are common systems worldwide. Philosophy should be as well. The word, "subject," has the highest scope of all words. When subjects combine a relation is formed. The relation that is formed can also be identified by a subject. Therefore, a subject can be used to identify the relation between subjects and relations. Since subjects exist, and relations exist, then the subject of subjects and relations exists. This system then has the highest scope of all possible systems. It is common throughout the world. All people are subjects and all people have relatives. Philosophy should acknowledge this with a name.

4
Justifications / Some Examples
« on: May 04, 2012, 09:51:25 PM »
A possible scenario someone brought to me once was, "What about the situation if all of one's relatives are estranged?"  I replied that subjects and relations are abstract terms, it always has to work.  In other words, even if one's relatives are estranged, or dead, or imaginary, they are still your relatives.  They were so because of a combination.  There is nothing that can change that.

In comparison to parts and wholes, if one disassembles a car into all of its parts, that doesn't mean a whole is not composed of parts. 

In comparison to one and many (mathematics), just because a child's homework assignment is composed of subtraction problems, that doesn't mean they can't be added together.

5
Information / Hard Morality and the Base Rule
« on: January 27, 2012, 10:46:22 PM »
There is no objective solution to morality in academic philosophy.  However, as subjects and relations theory is an objective view, morality is easily understood.  Morality, in common understanding, is refraining from doing what one wants because of cognitive reasons.  It differs from ethics in that ethics is determined from one's position (or job) in life, morality is not.  There are three types of morality:

1) Integrity - Lying, cheating and stealing.  Our morals refrain us from doing these to protect our integrity.

2) Soft Morality - Triage,  making a decision for better or worse.  Morality sometimes refrains us from making an immediate good in favor of a greater good. 

3) Hard Morality - The Base Rule.  The Base Rule is an axiom of subjects and relation theory.  It states that related subjects can not combine for the same reason unrelated subjects can not separate.  In life there are only three extrinsic subjects that are hard and immutable, they are permanent.  One is our species, an other is our family and the third is our gender.  Of the three our gender is the weakest as it can be changed with surgery or hormones but for practical purposes it is immutable too.  From hard morality comes the morals of cannibalism and incest.  In academic philosophy, these morals are called culturally relativistic.  In subjects and relations theory they are consequences.

There is also of course the issue of infidelity.  Infidelity in one sense is an act of lying or cheating which falls under the first type - integrity.  It is also a direct application of wrong - if a subject is not within an extrinsic subject.  (The extrinsic subject is the surname of the marriage.)

One last type of morality that is worth mentioning applies to the first axiom of subjects and relations theory.  This axiom, the league rule, states that, "An intrinsic subject can not combine with an extrinsic subject because if it did a new extrinsic subject would instantly be created."  An example of this is if a person gets married to their boss.  Employers are extrinsic to employees; it is therefore immoral to be in a position to be able to fire one's spouse.  If a new extrinsic subject were pertinent of this relation however, this rule would not apply. 

6
Metaphysics / In Relation to Physics
« on: January 26, 2012, 11:11:09 PM »
It has been said that there is some sort of conciousness that controls the universe.   As we all know, the study of physics is highly advanced and with the exception of some details it is quite accurate in explaining just about everything.  What physics doesn't do however, is explain why.  It doesn't explain why gravity exists, or why electric charge exists or light or heat.  Physics is a compilation of relations that explains how these phenomena function, not why they are there.  Such an answer can only be answered by philosophy. 

     There is only one universe.  There are people who believe in multiple universes and they will back their claims with mathematics and logic, but by definition of the word 'universe' there can only be one universe.  If something were to be found in a different universe then the mere fact of its existence makes it a part of this universe.  Therefore, because of the way we define the word, there is only one universe. 

     Physical reality and non-physical reality are parts of our universe.  Physical reality is explained by physics (thus the reason it is called physics) and non-physical reality is explained by the non-physical sciences such as art, music, literature and psychology.  Being parts of our universe, there must be something that explains them both; otherwise, multiple universes would exist.

     It is easy to identify the Subjations with non-physical reality.  Emotion theory is considered to be psychology, right and wrong is philosophy, the axioms are applicable to morality and this system as a whole is the reason for sports, art, music and even the structure of language.  How the Subjations applies to physical reality, physics, can be done as well.  It is the different forms of combination that can be associated with physical phenomena:

Primary Extrinsic - Gravity
Primary Intrinsic - Charge
Secondary - Transmutation
Leverage - Light
Contentment - Inertia
Tertiary - Heat

As a result, because extrinsic exists gravity exists.  It is an intercombination.

The existence of intrinsic gives us charge.  (Charge is always polarized. Intrinsic subjects are always related within an extrinsic subject.  Relations are always plural; therefore, they are always polarized.)  It is an intracombination.

Secondary combination, growth, is the same as the transmutation of our elements.  Adding protons transmutes the atomic number, adding neutrons transmutes the isotopes.

Leverage is the reason for light.  The decrease of energy level of a photon causes the increase of the energy level of other photons which is how light works.  It is the same with gamma rays which involve the nuclei of all atoms.  It is also the same with chemicals which all have acidity levels.

Contentment is analogous to inertia.  As it takes energy to change inertia, it takes energy to change contentment.

Tertiary combination is waves.  Waves are everywhere.  Physically, waves are heat. 

    In this way, these six forms of combination are how non-physical reality can be analogous to physical reality.  The only other phenomena of physics that do not fall into one of these six categories are the strong and weak forces of quantum mechanics.   My only ideas about them are that of being intrinsic of the intrinsic, a sort of intrinsic squared phenomena.  Its an idea worth mentioning but nothing more.  The Subjations will never be better than physics, but at least it gives us the why instead of just the how.

7
Purposes / In Relation to Other Worldviews
« on: January 26, 2012, 11:10:17 PM »
Although much has been said about emotion theory in this system, it is all based on subjects and relations which qualifies as a worldview.  To help understand what this means, here is what one would say concerning Darwin's theory of evolution from the point of view of these worldviews.

A Theist would say, "God created man and all living things.  Evolution theory is wrong."

An Atheist or a secular person would say, "The evidence presented in anthropology probably confirms that evolution theory is correct.  Darwin is one of the most influential scientists of all time."

A Subjationist, one who believes in the subject of subjects and relations, would say, "Evolution theory is redundant to my worldview.  I already know this.  I should have never heard of Darwin."

8
Purposes / Historical Perspective
« on: January 26, 2012, 11:09:05 PM »
The concept of subjects and relations goes all the way back to the middle ages and even as far back as Aristotle.  If you like, you can read more with this link: 
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/relations-medieval
However, they only thought of subjects and relations for the purpose of organization, not for emotions. 

Theories of emotions go way back as well.  Here is a link to Benedictus Spinoza's ideas of them from the 17th century: http://www.ship.edu/~cgboeree/spinozasemotions.html
He, as well as others, do not describe emotions in terms of subjects and relations.

9
Purposes / The Highest of All Possible Systems
« on: January 26, 2012, 11:08:03 PM »
Words have different levels of scope.  Proper nouns have the smallest scope as they are the most specific.  Common nouns have higher scope as they require articles to signify something specific.  Generalizations and categories have even higher scope as they contain common and proper nouns.  The term 'subject' has the highest scope of all as it can be cross-utilized for any generalization or category.

10
Justifications / It Must Be True
« on: January 26, 2012, 11:06:15 PM »
Logic dictates that something is true if the opposite if false. 
Let's say someone is not in the Subjations system.  Therefore, this person is not a subject.  He has no name.  He can't be identified.  Not only that but this person would deny his relatives.  Family members would be the same as all other people to him.  He wouldn't believe in groups or coherence.   Such an existance is impossible.

11
Justifications / Another Reason
« on: January 26, 2012, 11:05:42 PM »
Subjects exist.  Relations exist. 
There is no such thing as a singular relation.  Relations are composed of subjects.  A subject can be given to a relation.
Therefore, the subject of subjects and relations exists.

It is not much different than a whole is composed of parts or the many is composed of ones. 
With subjects and relations there is a bonus. The concept of relations enables the concepts of more and less.

12
Information / A More Detailed Explanation
« on: January 26, 2012, 11:04:45 PM »
We all know that pride is the opposite of shame.  If you look at the diagram, you will see pride opposing shame.  Jealousy is an emotion that never applies to oneself.  One can't be jealous of oneself.  Jealousy is therefore an antipathetic emotion.  It can be defined as antipathetic pride.  Likewise, one can't be dignified of someone else.  Dignity is an empathetic emotion.  It can be defined as empathetic pride.  Pride, jealousy and dignity are positive static emotions.  They are above contentment. 

Contentment is a relative position.  What maybe contentment for one person maybe pride to another.  The point is that some emotions are relative to the contentment position.

Below contentment is shame.  Shame is an emotion that means "is not enough."  The antipathetic version of shame is pity.  Pity is a bit confusing because it is not simply antipathetic shame but sympathy for antipathetic shame.  It is sympathy for someone else's misfortune.  For one's own misfortune the emotion is self-pity.  Self-pity is empathetic shame.  Modesty is at level with contentment, moderate. Modesty never occurs in the antipathetic form.  One could never have modesty for someone else.  Shame, pity and self-pity are negative static emotions.  They are below contentment.

Envy is the action toward jealousy because envy is an action emotion.  Such terms as envious and envying exist, but jealousious and jealousying do not.  Also, one cannot be envious of oneself. 
Similarly, honor is the action toward dignity.  The term honoring exists, but dignitying does not.  Again, one cannot have honor for someone else.  The same reasoning applies to disgust being the action toward pity and humility being the action toward modesty.  The term disgusting exists and one cannot have disgust for oneself, the term humiliating exists and one cannot have humility for someone else. 

The action emotions: envy, honor, disgust, humility and humiliation, are emotional actions.  They are not physical actions.  As these are emotional actions toward the static emotions, they fulfill a continuity.  Otherwise, without the action emotions there would exist a discontinuity between contentment and the static emotions.  The static emotions are: jealousy, pride, dignity, pity, shame and self-pity.

The emotions concerning expectation and standard are performance assessors.  They apply to a subject's performance.  The level of contentment that has existed in the past is known as standard and what should exist in the future is expectation.  The performance of a subject above standard or expectation is surprise.  The performance of a subject below standard or expectation is disappointment when applied to someone else antipathetically. The performance of a subject is embarrassment when applied to oneself.  After all one cannot have embarrassment for someone else.  One could have disappointment for oneself but that is looking at yourself from outside of oneself.  It is a mystery why embarrassment and disappointment are distinguished as empathetic and antipathetic yet surprise is not.

Sadness is excessive disappointment or embarrassment.  It is also a performance assessor.  To suffer great loss can be a sad event but only if the event wasn't expected or at standard.  This is how sadness differs from unhappiness.  Unhappiness is not a performance assessor.  Alternative to sadness is  ecstatic.  Ecstatic is excessive surprise.  These excessive performance assessors: sadness and ecstatic can cause us to tear up. 

Relations are either empathetic, apathetic or antipathetic.  Empathy and antipathy have their excessive versions themselves.  These are love and hate respectively.  Love is excessive empathy and hate is excessive antipathy.  I don't believe there is a word for excessive apathy.  It should be noted that with hate, as with the other antipathetic emotions, it is still within a relation.   An antipathetic relation is still a relation.  Also, to miss someone as in, "I miss you," is absent empathy. 

All of the emotions stated so far are relative emotions.  They are relative to contentment.  Contentment, however, is only one of the five types of happiness but it is probably the most common.  The four other types of happiness are 1stC, 2ndC, 3rdC and leverage.  The letter C signifies combination.  The letter H could work here, but C is used because the term "combination" is generic.   

To create a relation, 1stC, is the first type of happiness.  This occurs when a relation is first formed. The anticipation of 1stC is nervousness.  One gets nervous when a relation is anticipated to occur.  It is interesting to note that to occur and to happen are two verbs that can be used interchangeably.   Occur comes from occurence and happen comes from happiness.   Getting back to nervousness though, excessive nervousness is shyness.  To be shy is to be so excessively nervous that the combination doesn't occur. 

Alternatively, to separate a relation, 1stS, is the first type of unhappiness.  The anticipation of 1stS is worry.  One gets worried when a separation is anticipated to occur.  When worry gets to be extreme we call this emotion fear.  Fear is excessive worry.  To be excessively worried is to be afraid.  To be mildly worried is to be concerned.  To be excessively afraid is to be terrified.  Concern, worry, fear and terror are all interchangeable.  They only differ in intensity.  As one goes through life, one understands this. 

Taken as a group: nervous, shy, concern, worry, fear and terror are the anxiety emotions.  The emotion of anxiety can be interchanged with any of these emotions in this group.  What is special about the anxiety emotions is that they always occur before an event.  All other emotions occur after an event.

It is important to note that the anxiety emotion of nervous sometimes gets applied to fate.  For example, someone might say they are nervous when getting on an airplane.   They could just as easily say they are worried when getting on an airplane.  Worry is of course not the same as nervous.  Worry is the anticipation of unhappiness and nervous is the anticipation of happiness.  When worried about getting on an airplane we are so because we are anticipating unhappiness, when nervous about getting on an airplane we are so because we are anticipating fate as an event.   

The second type of happiness, 2ndC, occurs if a subject is combined with an existing relation.  Here the relation is not being formed, the relation already exists, it is just getting bigger.  With this type of happiness more and less apply.  Examples of 2ndC are growth and bragging.  Technically, the anxiety emotions apply with 2ndC as well as 1stC but when the anxiety emotions are applied to 2ndC they are more subtle. 

Once 2ndC is established, leverage happiness becomes applicable.  Leverage happiness occurs when a relative subject in a relation is decreased.  Even though a subject does nothing to be increased, if a relative subject decreases then all the other subjects are relatively increased.   The other subjects are antipathetic subjects.  This is why leverage happiness may be called antipathetic happiness.  Examples of this are kidding or teasing.  It is proper etiquette when employing leverage happiness for the sole purpose of happiness to say, "I am only kidding." 

3rdC is also an important type of happiness.  It is the back and forth vibration between two relations.  It is very common.  Examples of 3rdC are breathing, heartbeat, sleeping, sound, waves, heat and even conversation.

The three types of combination: 1stC, 2ndC and 3rdC, are what I believe to be a closed system of logic. On and off, stop and go, in and out, are all examples of 1stC.  More and less, higher and lower, bigger and smaller, are all examples of 2ndC.  Because back and forth does not apply to either 1stC or 2ndC is the reason for 3rdC.   There are no other types of combination that exist.

Once subjects combine and form a relation, 1stC, an extrinsic subject is formed.  Extrinsic subjects are subjects given to a relation.  They are the names given to groups.   Examples of extrinsic subjects are topics, nature and the last name, or surname, of a family.  In 1stC the extrinsic subject is being formed, in 2ndC the extrinsic subject already existed and in 3rdC more than one extrinsic subject apply.  Intrinsic subjects, conversely, are subjects within a relation.  They are the parts of a group.  The intrinsic subjects are related, relevant and relative to each other. 

Right is if a subject is within an extrinsic subject and possession is if a subject is intrinsic to an extrinsic subject.  Therefore, right is the inverse of possession.   For example, if a subject is in your possession, then you have a right to that subject.

Wrong, being the opposite of right, is if a subject is not within an extrinsic subject.  With morality an example of this is infidelity.  With patriotism an example of this is treason.

Good is to increase a relation and bad is to decrease or hinder a relation.   Because extrinsic subjects are, of course, subjects, good and bad are subjective. 

It is important to make clear that the words subjects, objects and units are somewhat interchangeable.  They can be substituted for one another yet they do not mean the same thing.  Subjects have properties and they have emotional ramifications.   Objects also have properties but they do not have emotional ramifications. Units do not have properties and units do not have emotional ramifications.  For example, if someone lost a finger as a unit that person would have one fewer body part, if the finger were considered to be an object then that finger would simply be gone, and as a subject that person would suffer pain.  Units are identified with numbers, objects can be created and destroyed without consequence, and subjects do have consequence which is otherwise known as bias.  Therefore, although relations can be composed of subjects, objects or units; in order to discuss emotion theory the term subjects must be employed.

There are two axioms that are necessary to include because they solve certain problems.  The first axiom, "The League Rule" or "The Authority Rule," states, "Extrinsic subjects can never be related to intrinsic subjects."  Such an event would instantly cause a new extrinsic subject to exist.   Therefore, the event could never occur.  Like items cannot be extrinsic and intrinsic to each other. 

The second axiom, "The Base Rule," states that, "Related subjects cannot combine."  This is true for the same reason that unrelated subjects cannot separate.  Once subjects are combined, they cannot combine again.  This is the basis for much of physical morality. 

The Subjations is intended to be an explanation of non-physical reality.   Although non-physical reality is not tangible (thus the reason it is called non-physical) it is reality all the same.  Naturalism is not the complete picture.   There are few things in the universe that are permanent and this is one of them.  Non-physical reality has always been and will always be.  All we can do is try to explain it better.  Otherwise people will either deny its existence or substitute it with fictional ideas instead.   After all, government is not a given.  Governments do change and sometimes they are not around at all.

13
Information / Categories of Emotions
« on: January 26, 2012, 11:04:19 PM »
Organizing emotions into categories looks like this:

Anxiety Emotions
             + Nervous, Shy
             - Concern, Worry, Fear, Terror
 
Empathetic Emotions
             + Dignity, Honor, Arrogance
             - Self-Pity, Modesty, Humility, Embarrassment
 
Antipathetic Emotions
             + Jealousy, Envy, Respect, Admiration
             - Pity, Disgust, Contempt, Disappointment
 
Extreme Emotions
             + Shy, Arrogance, Ecstatic, Love
             - Fear, Terror, Contempt, Sad, Hate, Horror

Performance Assessors
             + Surprise, Ecstatic
             - Disappointment, Embarrassment, Sad
 
Static Emotions
             + Pride, Jealousy, Respect, Dignity
             - Shame, Pity, Modesty, Sorry
 
Action Emotions
             + Envy, Honor, Admiration
             - Disgust, Humility, Regret

14
Information / The Symmetries of Emotions
« on: January 26, 2012, 11:03:40 PM »
One of the interesting aspects of Subjations theory is that it enables us to see how emotions are symmetric.
This table shows that symmetry.  The first example, pride and shame, can be read as, "Pride is the opposite of shame in terms of contentment."


     Emotion A                 Emotion B                     In Terms Of

     Pride                        Shame                         Contentment
     Jealousy                   Dignity                         Empathy and Antipathy
     Jealousy                   Pity                              Contentment
     Jealousy                   Self-Pity                       Contentment and Empathy/Antipathy
     Dignity                      Pity                              Contentment and Empathy/Antipathy
     Self-Pity                    Pity                              Empathy and Antipathy
     Envy                         Honor                           Empathy and Antipathy
     Envy                         Disgust                         Contentment
     Envy                         Humility                        Contentment and Empathy/Antipathy
     Honor                       Disgust                         Contentment and Empathy/Antipathy 
     Humility                    Disgust                         Empathy and Antipathy
     Arrogance                Contempt                      Contentment and Empathy/Antipathy
     Surprise                   Embarrassment             Contentment
     Surprise                   Disappointment             Contentment
     Embarrassment       Disappointment             Empathy and Antipathy
     Ecstatic                    Sad                               Contentment
     Happiness                Unhappiness                Combination and Separation
     Nervous                   Worry                            Combination and Separation
     Shy                          Fear                              Combination and Separation
     Concern                   Terror                            Mild and Extreme
     Satisfaction             Grief                              Possession
     Satisfaction             Distress                         Want
     Satisfaction             Relief                             Possession and Want
     Relief                       Distress                         Possession
     Relief                       Grief                              Want
     Distress                   Grief                              Possession and Want                   
     Forgive                    Blame                            Relevance
     Love                        Hate                              Empathy and Antipathy

15
Information / Psychological Dimensions
« on: January 26, 2012, 11:01:23 PM »
It is common to define a subject as an object of study.  Thus the reason we say we change subjects if a topic is changed.  In the Subjations system however, a subject is a cross-utilized unit of a relation.  This new definition is not much different than being an object of study but it includes the reason that elements of a topic are relevant or related. 

By defining a subject as a cross-utilized unit of a relation instead of as an object of study the concept of dimensionality comes into play.  Objects of study are one dimensional just as the units of a graph are of the first dimension along the x-axis of a Cartesian coordinate system.   When we include the concept of relations into the definition of a subject, the event of creating a relation is much like a function.  Functions are, after all, relations.  Therefore, a relation is nothing more than being in the second dimension or in the y-axis.  The y-axis in mathematics is the functional mapping of the x-axis, y = f(x).
The next dimension, the z-axis, contains multiple relations.  But that is it, there are no more dimensions.  The first dimension are subjects, the second dimension are relations and the third is multiple relations.  No more dimensions are possible.  In this way, if one says that a subject is an object of study, then this person has a one-dimensional mind.  To say that a subject is a cross-utilized unit of a relation is a sign of a three-dimensional mind.

Pages: [1] 2