"Born out of spirit of faith."
… As chances given prevail: Note for: 5/29/2022:
Not regretfully, that highly praised Sartre’s vision of the awareness of doubtfulness as itself as a ‘dominating approval for existence of consciousness’ of my own coexistence within, I realized my nature ought to be “as effective as the extra-polar governs, in sake of occasional scarification of my comfort.
Not any form of a forced, as primordially considered, towards Philebus of Plato; not the True-mine: As to those, are, -- so far: Republic, Parmenides, Euthyphro, Phaedo, Crito, Statesman and Sophist, Apology, but also: Theaetetus, for being is truly more than mere “becoming,” blooming, generative, recollection of – yourself, a question of a learning who you naturally are; becoming of powers, a friction between those polars, since the more of ‘data can be collected from the multitude, the more you know about an individual,’ for the collective is alleged naturally upon principle of Forms of the Good; as the cooperation between the three “colleagues” of Statesman, Parmenides and Sophist, comes along together. QED previously.
“Existence of God” is the quitessential Form of the real (belief), with the native realm, which only imitates, therefore the in-itself, solves the problem within, as to the faith comes along with chance for the “given Endymion of the experienced,” (your own dream of your life-experience, psych. simply, the: unconscious), for the matter is a habit which makes us the ‘real’ repetition, although sometimes needed, it teaches us to avoid the wrong recollection of the Endymion of the “past soul-existence,” so then the formation as an unified in once a complete perception then, reveals itself as nihil then, once finite, which denies such ‘the God,’ (only the faith, not the Form), same as confirms.
For 1) Consciences inside ‘offered’ consciousness is something of a reflection of a consciousness of the “other,” while the inputted then, the imprint, is searching for an endorsement from the hidden to which is needed to come to within, 2) For: It’s being denied by a statement: As the emptiness shows us our existence, is shows the non-existence of possible impossibility, which is also not. 3)
A) If I approve myself within truth of my Platonistic form, I approve my existence of my “experienced Good,” (all the empirical in or mind), – action will be allied or not accordingly to the Nominalistic vision (T. Aquinas, Ockham, Aristotle, &c.), B) Also on the second side I deny myself by “the authenticity of myself,” when I “Bear a ‘Bad faith’,” to which I hold towards to be my own wrongdoings, as a “serving to non-existent God,” (although He exists), but C) On the same way, I then reveal that the continuous emptiness is my own existence, my own God I believe in, so I approve such so-called natural antinomy of human reasoning, the agnosticism, when I:
Cannot prove and / cannot disapprove. So then, the usual existence of polarities then ought to exist, for otherwise the “disharmony” of one own’s self would collapse (W. Ockham), which we all should reach out in our essence as itself, as we are in fulness, where are we actually “Now-in-presence.” -- A demonstration of a natural paradox of a reasoning of man’s nature while decisions creating. (… Back to Transcendental Idealism, then. I. Kant. Unifying, or better: solving an issue between empiricism and rationalism.)