Proof of nonexistence of free will

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

No ! You can indeed report to partially absent things....if I say for instance that guigus is not here In Portugal I am asserting that something which exists is not here but elsewhere....now what I can´t do is to assert the non existence of the non existent which is completely different....and yes I was successful probably in a way that few can indeed comprehend...

When you say that I am not in Portugal you are denying my presence there, not my existence. But you can deny my existence as well, although you would be wrong, at least for now.

Don't fool yourself: negation refers to something by asserting it is nothing, which makes it always contradictory.

guigus wrote:

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

No ! You can indeed report to partially absent things....if I say for instance that guigus is not here In Portugal I am asserting that something which exists is not here but elsewhere....now what I can´t do is to assert the non existence of the non existent which is completely different....and yes I was successful probably in a way that few can indeed comprehend...

When you say that I am not in Portugal you are denying my presence there, not my existence. But you can deny my existence as well, although you would be wrong, at least for now.

Don't fool yourself: negation refers to something by asserting it is nothing, which makes it always contradictory.

No guigus NO !

Negation only refers to partial temporal and spatial absences and never to potential absences !

the use of the term nothing as in all language it is a practical use not a pseudo theoretical one !

Total non being does not refer at all !

A potential absence intends to refer to that which is not potentially possible...such things as squared circles...(using a mobile android phone)

Granted, squared circles cannot exist either in the past or the future. One cannot square a circle without denying its essential nature. If it becomes an empirical square, it does so at the expense of its circularity. Only as a fanatstic ideational construction can there be a "squared circle", not to mention a "circled square". Is this only a matter of logical contradiction, or is it something more interesting?

It's based on language and concepts. We learn early on that a square peg will not fit in a round hole. That translates into reality for most of us. Some people begin to question forms to confuse basic concepts. There might be some benefit to such an exercise, but for most, accepting the basic premise is enough to survive in this world.

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

A potential absence intends to refer to that which is not potentially possible...such things as squared circles...(using a mobile android phone)

So squared circles can exist in the future? Sorry, but squared circles will remain an actual absence in the future, just like they are now.

(This little thing you are typing on is not helping you much.)

Potential absences? The absence of those chairs is actual, not potential.

Absolute nothingness "does not refer" to any practical experience of ours, as neither absolute being does. However, you are confusing our lack of any practical experience of absolute being or nothingness with their having no meaning, which is an entirely different matter, as also not the case. Indeed, if absolute being and nothingness had no meaning, then we couldn't even realize we have no practical experience of them, and you could't be so busy trying to show they are not the same.

guigus wrote:

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

A potential absence intends to refer to that which is not potentially possible...such things as squared circles...(using a mobile android phone)

So squared circles can exist in the future? Sorry, but squared circles will remain an actual absence in the future, just like they are now.

(This little thing you are typing on is not helping you much.)

How come you read exactly the opposite of what I said ???
...there are things that are potentially possible and yet did n´t come into existence presently.
Not potentially possible means that they will never be possible go it ?
...it was a reply to more nonsense from you remember ? I was trying to explain what does it mean potentially possible and potentially not possible since you were having trouble with it...

Quote:

Potential absences? The absence of those chairs is actual, not potential.

...oh, and by the way there´s no debate going on, the matter it is settled for most...

...chairs are potentially possible even if they are presently absent somewhere...

...while squared circles are not potentially possible not now not ever thus consequently they will never be actual...

its hard to talk with someone so messy like you guigus in fact quite pointless...you just don´t grasp the simplest of concepts...

A potential absence intends to refer to that which is not potentially possible...

Quote:

Absolute nothingness "does not refer" to any practical experience of ours, as neither absolute being does. However, you are confusing our lack of any practical experience of absolute being or nothingness with their having no meaning, which is an entirely different matter, as also not the case. Indeed, if absolute being and nothingness had no meaning, then we couldn't even realize we have no practical experience of them, and you could't be so busy trying to show they are not the same.

...if I just did explain to you that the use of the term nothingness refers to partial absences not potential (total) absences, what is it that you don´t get ?

Total being is meaningful in the sum of all those things that are experienced by us, beyond which it turns meaningless...

total absence in turn does n´t refer to whatever once its about that which cannot be conceived not even potentially, stuff like squared circles and other nonsense, which it is not experienced, thus it is not absent because it was never present in the first place it simply does not exist you dumb ass !!!!!

You don´t even know what absent means...geeeee!!!

Absent can only report to potentially possible stuff, like chairs not squared circles, which while potentially existing did n´t come to manifest themselves somewhere as actual yet...for instance the first person who actually brought up the first chair it did so because such chair was potentially possible !

It was you to identify absolute nothingness with not being absent, not me.

You are confusing absence with vanishing: it is not a requirement for something to be absent that it had already been present, or even that it was or will be possibly present. Simply put, either something is absent or otherwise present: if it is not absent, then it is present, and if it is not present, then it is absent---that's all there is to it. You "just don't grasp the simplest of concepts"...

The concept of being applies to all being, whether experienced by us or not. The concept referring only to what we have already experienced is the concept of experience, not of being.

Quote:

It was you to identify absolute nothingness with not being absent, not me.

I don´t identify nothingness with not being absent idiot I simply put said the term absent won´t apply !

Quote:

You are confusing absence with vanishing: it is not a requirement for something to be absent that it had already been present, or even that it was or will be possibly present. Simply put, either something is absent or otherwise present: if it is not absent, then it is present, and if it is not present, then it is absent---that's all there is to it. You "just don't grasp the simplest of concepts"...

And what something is that moron ???

Lol...just answer this question guigus What is it that is absent when you use the term absent eh ? I suspect there´s a large black hole going around in your mind...