DOES NOTHING EXIST???

@MKov,

MKov wrote:

If nothing exists, then we are nothing.

nothing=existing
me=existing
you=existing
me=nothing
you=nothing
nothing=something

0 Replies

@Cyracuz,

Now can I just say both of you seem a little mental, arguing about......nothing. There is no escaping this as people will have different perceptions of 'nothing' as it has no context attached.
I still think that universally it does exist as you need a void (a space) for 'something' to exist

1 Reply

@TheoryJester,

Hehe.. the way I see it, anyone who are inclined to say "nothing exists" or "nothing doesn't exist" is a little mental. The question that is the headline to this thread is invalid. An example of another invalid question could be "what is the color of verbs?". The initial question of this thread is in the same category as that one.
If you were to ask, "does four exist", you would probably see it a little clearer.
"Does bigger exist?" Smaller, right, left. Do they exist?
What all these words have in common is that they are meaningless without reference to something. Talking about "nothing" as an existing or non-existing thing is just nonsense.
Now, guigus is just a mildly retarded egomaniac who will say anything to avoid admitting that he's talking ****, and my activity in this thread recently is just an experiment to see how far he will take it. There seems to be no limit...

2 Replies

@Cyracuz,

Perhaps the question should have been "Does nothingNESS exist???" But I guess that would not be more sensible than "Does SOMETHINGness exist???"
Can we say: Is there an empirically reasonable referent for the word "nothing-ness."?
Don't we have to refer to the absence of something specific? Is the absence of something empirical?
Very difficult. This is why I did not take up philosophy as an academic career.

1 Reply

@JLNobody,

I think of this as an issue of semantics, not of philosophy. The entire issue of "nothing" comes from the dualistic nature of thoughts shaped by language. Things and concepts evolve on their own as linguistic phrasings become absorbed by cultural references, and they sometimes result in issues that are simply irrelevant to reality beyond words. This whole debate is about a realm of metaphysics created by us interpreting concepts without their relations.
A similar issue is that of free will. People ask if it exists or not, because in the years and years of this concept being used in many different contexts we have somehow started believing that it is a phenomenon in itself rather than a description of an aspect of our experience. It seems kind of misguided to debate the existence of a description. We could debate it's validity, but that is different.

3 Replies

@Cyracuz,

Quote:

I think of this as an issue of semantics, not of philosophy.

words are too ambiguous. That's why sometimes we need so many words to explain nothing.

1 Reply

@zt09,

Or maybe it is we who are ambiguous... Would amount to the same thing perhaps..

1 Reply

@Cyracuz,

Cyracuz wrote:

Like I said, I am guigus proof. No need to apologize.
And if you really did know how I think we would not be having this argument. But I'm having fun pressing your buttons, so keep it coming.

Why keep it coming if you are not understanding a word?

0 Replies

@MKov,

MKov wrote:

If nothing exists, then we are nothing.

Here is someone that can think.

0 Replies

@Cyracuz,

Cyracuz wrote:

Or maybe it is we who are ambiguous... Would amount to the same thing perhaps..

Or maybe words, ourselves, and everything else is ambiguous...

0 Replies

@Cyracuz,

Cyracuz wrote:

I think of this as an issue of semantics, not of philosophy. The entire issue of "nothing" comes from the dualistic nature of thoughts shaped by language. Things and concepts evolve on their own as linguistic phrasings become absorbed by cultural references, and they sometimes result in issues that are simply irrelevant to reality beyond words. This whole debate is about a realm of metaphysics created by us interpreting concepts without their relations.
A similar issue is that of free will. People ask if it exists or not, because in the years and years of this concept being used in many different contexts we have somehow started believing that it is a phenomenon in itself rather than a description of an aspect of our experience. It seems kind of misguided to debate the existence of a description. We could debate it's validity, but that is different.

Talking of a word salad...

0 Replies

@Cyracuz,

Cyracuz wrote:

I think of this as an issue of semantics, not of philosophy. The entire issue of "nothing" comes from the dualistic nature of thoughts shaped by language. Things and concepts evolve on their own as linguistic phrasings become absorbed by cultural references, and they sometimes result in issues that are simply irrelevant to reality beyond words. This whole debate is about a realm of metaphysics created by us interpreting concepts without their relations.
A similar issue is that of free will. People ask if it exists or not, because in the years and years of this concept being used in many different contexts we have somehow started believing that it is a phenomenon in itself rather than a description of an aspect of our experience. It seems kind of misguided to debate the existence of a description. We could debate it's validity, but that is different.

So nothing is a description? Of what?

You have an amazing capacity of ignoring your own thoughts...

1 Reply

@guigus,

Quote:

So nothing is a description? Of what?

Of whatever you are using the word about.

You have an amazing capacity of inflating the worth of your thoughts.

1 Reply

@Cyracuz,

Cyracuz wrote:

Quote:
So nothing is a description? Of what?

Of whatever you are using the word about.

You have an amazing capacity of inflating the worth of your thoughts.

Now you forgot you are talking about nothing, so there is nothing you are "using the word about," hence nothing to "describe."

PS: The worth of my thoughts will be clear to you once you understand them.

0 Replies

Here is why nothing is ambiguous:

Code:

Nothing is not each being.

Not each being is not each being.

Any being is any other being.

1 Reply

@guigus,

You sure love your word salad.

1 Reply

@Cyracuz,

Cyracuz wrote:

You sure love your word salad.

Your comment is irrelevant (as usual), since it leaves my argument unaddressed:

Code:

Nothing is not each being.

Not each being is not each being.

Any being is any other being.

2 Replies

@guigus,

Well, you have yet to address my many comments to that same argument. I have shown you time and again that what you present as an argument is, in fact, nothing of the kind. It is just a string of words. So please refer to my previous posts for a clarification, or continue to ignore them as you did when they were first posted. Your choice.

0 Replies

@guigus,

Oh heck.. here goes again.

Quote:

Nothing is not each being.

A poorly constructed sentence, making it kind of ambiguous. In fact, it our outright meaningless.

Quote:

Not each being is not each being

This one is also far too ambiguous to form a premise of an argument. Also a very poorly constructed sentence that breeds more confusion that clarity.

Quote:

Any being is any other being.

Logically, this cannot be concluded from the two previous statements. It simply does not follow from it. The whole thing is just senseless. A parody of an argument at best.

I think there is evidence enough in this thread to support the objective fact that you are just a moron. Have a nice day.

1 Reply

@Cyracuz,

Cyracuz wrote:

Oh heck.. here goes again.

Quote:
Nothing is not each being.

A poorly constructed sentence, making it kind of ambiguous. In fact, it our outright meaningless.

How is it ambiguous? What are the possible meanings?

Cyracuz wrote:

Quote:
Not each being is not each being

This one is also far too ambiguous to form a premise of an argument. Also a very poorly constructed sentence that breeds more confusion that clarity.

Again, what are the possible meanings?

Quote:

Any being is any other being.

Cyracuz wrote:

Logically, this cannot be concluded from the two previous statements. It simply does not follow from it. The whole thing is just senseless. A parody of an argument at best.

This is not a "conclusion": it is just a rewording.

Cyracuz wrote:

I think there is evidence enough in this thread to support the objective fact that you are just a moron. Have a nice day.

In the end, you keep confusing to discuss about nothing with saying nothing, and still not addressing my argument:

Code:

Nothing is not each being.

Not each being is not each being.

Any being is any other being.

1 Reply

DOES NOTHING EXIST???

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know