Comment on pg. 22 continued from last blog.<\/p>\n
[Now, let me consider science for a moment. \u00a0\u00a0The only way to study the realm of actuality is to only consider dyadic relations.\u00a0 But how do you do that?<\/p>\n
The realms of normal context and possibility are always getting in the way.\u00a0 After all, the nested form is:<\/p>\n
Triadic relations3<\/sub>( dyadic relations2<\/sub>( monads1<\/sub>))<\/p>\n Normal context3<\/sub>( actuality2<\/sub>( possibility1<\/sub>))<\/p>\n Perhaps, that is why “exclusion of divine causation” must be methodological.<\/p>\n The normal context must methodically eliminate alternate possibilities.\u00a0 Empirical scientists are always worried about the quality of their controls and their measurements.\u00a0\u00a0 We can only truly see dyadic cause and effect by restricting normal context and by eliminating alternate possibilities.<\/p>\n This is very difficult to do.\u00a0 We can only see cause and effect when we are restricted to the referential; that is, to true as opposed to false.]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Comment on pg. 22 continued from last blog. [Now, let me consider science for a moment. \u00a0\u00a0The only way to study the realm of actuality is to only consider dyadic relations.\u00a0 But how do you do that? The realms of normal context and possibility are always getting in the way.\u00a0 After all, the nested form […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1139","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-the-science-of-original-sin"],"yoast_head":"\n