It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Necessity and Possibility

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 21 2010 @ 10:28 PM
It is upon the first cause of things we come to basic understanding of things these things are known as necessity are that needed to sustain the material of substance as being something Universal releasing all energy contained within each individual. First off it is necessary to say explain something or put a limit on it in terms of understanding it as it must exist as something interchangeable of our explanation of it. This is not to say the words we use to describe the meaning of what we perceive is necessarily false but only freely able to express possibility or come to a reason without necessarily having a base upon which to exist a cause. Nature surrounds itself around possibility things from their beginning as containing the free energy of necessity it is the force which guides nature.
This force is identified through being this being necessitates that the possibility of a thing to be recognized it must be first a subject or subject to a species of being. A specific being being is not merely an unknown thing we cannot connect to as being in the material world but the material world puts its own terms around the existence of being within species. It is then through possibility we can attain limited knowledge of ourselves existing as substance.

It is only possible though that this possibility which in humans is identified as reason is able to associate itself with a property or object. Though essentially reason and possibility does not associate itself with property of substance or as we know it as the individual as we observe it but as perceive it as a part of us. This is to say our own perception of object is necessary to make a reasonable objection to it existing. It is our perception upon which we are certain of ourselves as existing within thing. This knowledge of the thing though can only be known as an interchangeable part of self and it is upon this then that we are able to identify the object as it pertains to its species of origin. It is only upon the universal idea of humanity that we can have an exact science upon which nature can be understood.

Man though as we know it in his most primitive understands his individual or it is revealed in the empirical. Though to say this alone identifies man is then to say there is no freedom to be distinguished in man. That he is bound to his own nature of seeking the necessity contained within man not necessarily expressing the potential that is possible of it but as existing as pure being contained within nature subject and enslaved to it. Man is only able to govern himself and realize his metaphysical potential and superiority over nature through possibility it is the nature of man to express this but it is only through a controlled consciousness of what we perceive being absorbed consciously as something known. This though is not what defines man nor his physical body but these are parts of his essence his essence does not belong to nature but is supernatural or something that is free to go beyond the natural.

This is man he is either to subject due to his own lack of developed potential that he becomes not man in mind only in flesh no more then an animal with a mind connected to his consciousness of things not as consciousness but as that contained within the thing that thing which is the origins of his free association with possibility. This is necessity that which dictates man's instinct to survive as he relates to nature. Man then must subject himself to nature for necessity to make its peace with man. He must devote himself to toiling and controlling the earth in order to feed himself and cultivate himself.

It is this brute and primitive instinct in man to thus produce that is the idea upon which the possibility of these not only existing as for him to experience but to know to integrate as part of his being. It is this reason upon which our own reason is able to develop itself as being part of our being as our own what makes different. Reason though is different then the brute drive and motivation for man to fulfill his necessities that is his pleasure and appetite. It is this necessity which drives man to become himself but if man only perceiving this as an experience which normally a man only observes he himself cannot change himself as his substance has allowed for him to change it but only fulfill the desires of his survival.

Humanity though is much more then survival and it is the necessity of our souls which desire this. This potential is cultivated through reason which denies our pleasures and sensual appetites from enslaving us to nature but by allowing us to free our mind and govern it and become essentially the being we were made to be. The fact that there such a great divide between nature and the supernatural there must be evidence of some other being existing far beyond ourselves.

The supernatural has limits confined in our knowledge and rationalization of it. There are basic truths upon which it exist

posted on May, 24 2010 @ 09:39 PM
I find your post rather confusing. Perhaps we are speaking a different language. If you would like to learn about my language and how it uses the terms 'possibility' and 'necessity' I suggest reading this article:

posted on May, 24 2010 @ 09:43 PM
There are those who, through an aberration of the intellect, can see nothing in organized beings but the action of matter, and attribute to this action all the phenomena of existence.

They have seen, in the human body, only the action of an electrical machine they have studied the mechanism of life only in the play of the bodily organs, they have often seen life extinguished by the rupture of a filament, and they have seen nothing but this filament.

They have looked to see whether anything still remained, and as they have found nothing but matter that has become inert, as they have neither seen the soul escape from the body nor been able to take hold of it, they have concluded that everything is reducible to the properties of matter, and that death is consequently the annihilation of all thought. A melancholy conclusion, if such were really the case for, were it so, good and evil would be alike devoid of aim every man would be justified in thinking only of himself, and in subordinating every other consideration to the satisfaction of his material instincts.

Thus all social ties would be broken, and the holiest affections would be destroyed forever. Happily for mankind, these ideas are far from being general. Their area may even be said to be a narrow one, limited to the scope of invidious opinions; for nowhere have they been erected into a system of doctrine.

A state of society founded on such a basis would contain within itself the seeds of its own dissolution; and its members would tear each other to pieces like so many ferocious beasts of prey.
Man has an intuitive belief that, for him, everything does not end with the life of his body; he has a horror of annihilation. No matter how obstinately men may have set themselves against the idea of a future life, there are very few who, on the approach of death, do not anxiously ask themselves what is going to become of them for the thought of bidding an eternal adieu to life is appalling to the stoutest heart. Who, indeed could look with indifference on the prospect of an absolute and eternal separation from all that he has loved?

Who, without terror, could behold, yawning beneath him, the bottomless abyss of nothingness in which all his faculties and aspirations are to be swallowed up forever? Who could calmly say to himself, "After my death there will be nothing for me but the void of annihilation; all will be ended. A few days hence, all memory of me will have been blotted out from the remembrance of those who survive me, and the earth itself will retain no trace of my passage. Even the good that I have done will be forgotten by the ungrateful mortals whom I have benefited. And there is nothing to compensate me for all this loss, no other prospect, beyond this ruin, than that of my body devoured by worms!"

Is there not something horrible in such a picture, something that sends an icy chill through the heart? Religion teaches us that such cannot be our destiny; and reason confirms the teachings of religion. But the vague, indefinite assurance of a future existence, which is all that is given us either by religion or by reason, cannot satisfy our natural desire for some positive proof in a matter of such paramount importance for us; and it is just the lack of such proof, in regard to a future life, that, in so many cases, engenders doubt as to its reality.

"Admitting that we have a soul," many very naturally ask, "what is our soul? Has it a form, an appearance of any kind? is it a limited being, or is it something undefined and impersonal? Some say that it is 'a breath of God:' Others, that it is a 'spark' others, again, declare it to be 'part of the Great Whole, the principle of life and of Intelligence.' But what do we learn from these statements? What is the good of our possessing a soul, if our soul is to be merged in immensity like a drop of water in the ocean? Is not the loss of our individuality equivalent, so far as we are concerned, to annihilation?

The soul is said to be immaterial; but that which is immaterial can have no defined proportions, and therefore can have no reality for us. Religion also teaches that we shall be happy, or unhappy, according to the good or the evil we have done; but of what nature are the happiness or unhappiness thus promised us in another life? Is that happiness a state of beatitude in the bosom of God, an external contemplation, with no other employment than that of singing the praises of the Creator?

And the flames of hell, are they a reality or a figure of speech? The Church itself attributes to them a figurative meaning; but of what nature are the sufferings thus figuratively shadowed forth? And where is the scene of those sufferings? In short, what shall we be, what shall we do, what shall we see, in that other world which is said to await us all?"

posted on May, 28 2010 @ 12:40 AM
To give credit where credit is due, your entire post seems to come directly from The Spirits' Book by Allan Kardec. Originally published: 1856. Pages 112-113 of the 2006 Cosimo, Inc. edition. ISBN: 1-596-05958-3.

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
There are those who, through an aberration of the intellect, can see nothing in organized beings but the action of matter, and attribute to this action all the phenomena of existence. [...]

new topics

top topics

log in