Leo Gura

Inside and outside is a duality. They are co-defined. You can't have an inside without an outside unless you have an Absolute or Infinity. Infinity can have only "inside". But every finite thing must have an inside and an outside. If there is only inside or only outside the thing is either infinitely large or infinitely small. Every slice has two sides. You can't have an up without a down, since up and down are relative to each other. This is actually a great proof of the Oneness of Absolutes. The only thing that can have a One is an Absolute. Oness is a property of an Absolute. Absolute is God.

Everything just has a Meta-Unity. Language and thought simply breaks down at this ultimate level. If everything is real, that's a Unity.

I don't need to believe in it. I became directly conscious that God is Everything. Yes, Oneness is more inclusive than 300-ness. But Oneness still allows 300-ness to exist.

Sure, include all those things. Everything is still One. One is an absolute. It's not different from many. Oneness contains manyness within it.

@Synchronicity Here is a dead simple logical proof of Oneness: Take the notion of Everything. Everything must be One. Why? Because any thing whatsoever must be included in Everything. If you can think of or imagine a thing which isn't part of Everything, that means you didn't have Everything, so just include that thing into Everything. So by absolute logic Everything must be One. There can only be one Everything. Everything must also be infinite since Everything can hold an infinite number of things. Since numbers are things, we can see that Everything must at least contain all the numbers, which means Everything is infinite. It is impossible to imagine anything that is not a "thing" since I define "thing" as anything whatsoever, including "non-things". So Everything is God. Classical logic. Doubt it all you like, but it is true.

The whole chain is LOVE, so the kangaroo is just part of the chain. Like the reason for a brick in a house is the house. A kangaroo is just one brick within LOVE.

I do say that within Infinity everything has an ultimate reason. And that reason is LOVE. So the kangaroo is there because LOVE requires it.

My claim is that they could not have a logic in which they see that reality is not One or Infinity. Or if they did, it would be self-deception. Other than that, they can have all sorts of weird applications of logic which I have not considered thus far.

Your stuff is not illogical, it is hyper-logical. My worldview accounts for that. I call that hyperbolic logic.

That's right, but logicians don't grasp the significance of that. Everything is uncaused, but people are blind to the magic of God since they don't see the infinity at work in all things.

I'm not denying classical logic per se, I'm just saying it needs to be fully applied and its ramifications traced through completely. The problem is that classical logicians stop short of this. They don't see the radical ramifications of classic logic as applied to the problem of existence and ontology. How do you get something from nothing? Classical logic doesn't go that deep. Although it could if pushed. Which is basically what I did with my proofs.

@Synchronicity Conventional logic requires that all finite things have a cause and they cannot be their own cause nor exist for no reason whatsoever. It is highly unconventional to say that a kangaroo exists for no reason and with no cause. And this logic is correct. Finite things require other finite things as causes. An infinite thing does not need a cause because infinite logic allows it to be self-created/eternal.

@Synchronicity I see our views as quite compatible. We might differ on how exactly Infinity manifests itself in all its weird edge-cases. I don't claim absolute knowledge of all the edge-cases of Infinity. To me those are interesting details. You have a better sense of those edge-cases than me.

It's only restricted in the sense that it doesn't admit false things as true. My logic doesn't really restrict what sort of phenomena are found within reality. Flying 5 dimensional unicorns are allowed. Even finite sub-realities are allowed, as long as they are part of Infinity. Anything that can be coherently imagined is allowed. If you can figure out a way to coherently imagine a 4 sided triangle then it can exist. Otherwise it cannot.

It's restricted in that false things can't be true. Your view is also restricted by truth. We are all restricted by truth. If truth was not restricting you then you wouldn't be disputing anything I say since anything I say is as good as any view you hold. There is no way around Truth.

Why is your logic more restricted than a child's? A child's logic allows for 4 sided triangles and yours does not. Why is your logic so limited? Why don't you employ the logic of an imbicile? Look how much more freedom you will have! Truth restricts logic. How annoying! Just because you can imagine a finite reality doesn't mean you are actually being logical. You would need to trace the logical consequences of your fantasy. That's not trivial. It is not easy to see all the ramifications of our fantasies. It similar to playing chess. A bad chess player does not see the logical consequences of his moves far into the future, so to him a move can look good when it actually ends in checkmate.

It tastes gross but otherwise okay and same effect as synthetic.

It does not defy materialist human logic. But human logic is woefully inadequate and means nothing other than human social norms. Understanding the logic of God requires making new logical connections that standard logicians do not make. So a finite material reality is incoherent not from the POV of coventional logic but from the POV of God. From a human POV atheism is coherent, but this is meaningless. From an idiot's POV Nazism or MAGA is coherent. So what? A child could think that 4 sided triangles are coherent. That's not by problem, that's the child's problem. Whether one sees coherence or incoherence very much depends on the intelligence of one's mind. It's not a singular canonical conclusion of all minds. What is incoherent to me might look coherent to you. The mind is a master at making incoherent things seem coherent but simply being blind to things. A finite material reality is incoherent once one understands that finite things can never be self-created, nor can they be eternal because eternity necessitates Infinity. The missing piece of conventional logic is that it does not understand that if any part of reality is eternal or infinite, all of reality must be. And then there is a further failure to understand what infinity entails. Conventional logicians simply have no idea how serious infinite anything is. And nothing can help them other than Awakening. My proofs only work for a mind that has a profound grasp of the significance of Infinity. And that's as it should be, because I am describing the logic of how anything at all can exist. This should be expected to be an advanced thing, like trying to understand an advanced mathematical theorem. This requires deep intelligence to connect important dots. If those dots are not connected then the logical entailments will not be visible. It takes an advanced mind to see logical entailments of the kind we are talking about.

Eternity and Infinity are the same thing. Time doesn't ever start. Time is imaginary. You are imagining its start. Beginning and end are imaginary. Reality/God has no beginning or end. Every point within God is both beginning and end at once, since all difference is imaginary. God is a circle where every point is its beginning and end.

Because what you want is impossible. Mind has infinite capacity to imagine endless doubt and incoherent nonsense. Any proof can always be doubted. You cannot even prove A = A because I could create the doubt that your brain is malfunctioning and actually A != A. Or that in alternative universe A != A. This limit is inherent to human sensemaking. There is no line of reasoning that can assuage all imaginable doubts. It is logical but whether logic applies to God can only be know through empirical exploration of God. You technically cannot know that the world is logical until you empirically explore it. Logic is not as a priori as people want to belive. A baby does not know if logic is true. That's just to say that existence is logical. Actually they can't. You can imagine a reality where A != A. The only reason A = A is accepted as true is simply because of social convention and laying down doubt. At some point you just have to stop doubting, or if you don't you turn into a buffoon. All logic depends on accepting certain things as fundamental and beyond further explanation. A = A is one of those things. The notion that everything logical can be derived through air-tight logic is simply a very bad human idea. Which is why I told you to present your own better proof. Because you will see that the very notion of proof is quite a flimsy thing that requires many assumptions no matter how good your proof is. No proof can withstand an absolute skeptic. Proof is just inherently limited. This needs to be kept in mind when creating or criticizing any proof of anything. God is a tautology. But that doesn't mean the human mind will see it that way prior to Awakening.

Infinity still operates by a certain logic. The logic of Oneness. This is just an empirical matter. You can doubt whether logic is needed or not, but it just turns out existence has logic to it. A = A. There's just no getting around that. An amechanical finite thing doesn't work. An amechanical infinite thing does work. Why? Because Infinity is unlimited and finite things are not. Again, a tautology. Yes. Because that's how reality is. I didn't make up the rules. Yes, that's fine. Yup. Not fine. Sorry, that's just how the cookie crumbles. 3 sided triangles are fine and 4 sided ones are not fine. If you don't like it you can file a complaint with God.

But a finite thing is logically incoherent for many reasons which I discussed in the video. A finite thing cannot technically come into being without an infinite thing. Finite things are just off-shoots of Infinity. Many of my proofs covered this point. All limits are finite and require other limits to enforce them, leading to an infinite chain of limits which ends in Infinity. If a triangle could have 4 sides then it would genuinely break geometry. But a triangle cannot have 4 sides. So you are positing a scenario which seems like it is possible but upon deeper logical scrutiny is not possible. The problem is that the mind can indeed imagine all sorts of absurd things which seem like they could be possible, like 4 sided triangles, square circles, and a genuinely finite reality. "Genuinely finite reality" is an oxymoron. There cannot be such a thing. But it sure seems to a materialist that there can. If someone insists that 4 sided triangles are possible, I can't really convince them otherwise. That is their own self-deception. Logic only works up to the point where one is willing to stick to it. And if one just wants to say anything goes. Well, that just proves Infinity. If anything goes, Infinity. And why wouldn't anything go? What would stop it?

Why do you exist? What is the logic of your existence? And if you claim to be unlimited, why are you unlimited? What is the logic of your unlimitedness?

Yes, but Oneness/Unity is just one part of my proof. First we realize that Oneness must be true of reality. Then we must one go step further to realize that Oneness/Unity means Absolute Power/Omnipotence since Oneness logically necessitates that all limits be contained inside of Oneness. The power of Oneness is that it means all limits are interior to it. There is no "other" to control or limit it. All its limits are self-limits, which can be undone. The key to the proof is realizing that Oneness/Unity has the magical property of being all-powerful. The point is, anything that is absolutely ONE must be God. So that's how it's different from just a unified material reality. Materialism does not grasp the power of Oneness. Oneness logically means unlimitedness. Unlimitedness is God. Just because I -- Leo -- exclude things from my worldview or even my conception of Infinity does not mean that Infinity excludes those things. Leo's personal understanding of Infinity can be limited, but Infinity itself is not limited by Leo's understanding of it. My proof is not that my worldview is perfect but simply that reality is Infinity and Infinity is God. We can debate about what exactly Infinity includes or excludes or entails. That part is up for debate and I am open to your ideas about it. My notion of Infinity does not exclude Infinity severely limiting itself. It's important to distinguish my personal worldview -- which is always evolving and fallible -- with Infinity itself. Infinity itself is true. The rest is details, which are beyond the scope of my proofs.

Cute.