DOES NOTHING EXIST???

@sometime sun,

sometime sun wrote:

mark noble wrote:

In your opinion - does nothing exist,

No

mark noble wrote:

has it ever existed,

No

mark noble wrote:

can it ever exist?[/b]

No

Nothing is Nothing
not
Nothing is not Nothing.

Thanks, not always easy to answer though.

I'd agree with the above

0 Replies

@mark noble,

mark noble wrote:

As simple as that.........DOES NOTHING EXIST???

In your opinion - does nothing exist, has it ever existed, can it ever exist?

Just tell it as you see it! All are welcome to throw it out there.

Thank you guys.
Mark...

I would say that one cannot really prove anything does or does not exist. After-all what would be the basis for that, our knowledge doesn't extend to things that doesn't exist, we know nothing about them....how can we?
Are thoughts are the only real things we can say do exist, it's our thoughts that make us wonder these things, and if it is that none of this exists then it's are thoughts that are fueling this world.

0 Replies

to combat this question i look at an empty box. whats inside it i ask myself? nothing because its empty. therefore i recognise the concept of nothingness and if i recognise it then it must exist. so the next logical question for me is what is nothing? well nothing must be something because it exists as a concept, so if i take a step back and look from a different angle i ask myself what is something: well everything is something. ergo nothing is something is everything (im a bit of a descartes fan Very Happy

) however in most if not all things there is balance. balance means two sides: life and death, yin and yang, etc therefore it is only logical that things exist then things must not exist, yet they do due to the thought of them.

1 Reply

@adampearson,

adampearson wrote:

to combat this question i look at an empty box. whats inside it i ask myself? nothing because its empty. therefore i recognise the concept of nothingness and if i recognise it then it must exist. so the next logical question for me is what is nothing? well nothing must be something because it exists as a concept, so if i take a step back and look from a different angle i ask myself what is something: well everything is something. ergo nothing is something is everything (im a bit of a descartes fan ) however in most if not all things there is balance. balance means two sides: life and death, yin and yang, etc therefore it is only logical that things exist then things must not exist, yet they do due to the thought of them.

I think you are confusing the neuronal pattern that exists in people's brains and which they commonly refer to as the concept "nothing" and the "nothing" that the concept is attempting to represent. This neuronal pattern, of course, exists. But what it is attempting to imperfectly (by definition) represent, logically, does not.

Nothing mean nothing. Which by definition, cannnot include the space that exists in an "empty" box

1 Reply

@stevecook172001,

yet we do not see this space inside so how can we on a cartesian level know that it exists? after all descartes demon is an expirement in the reaffirmation of fundamental knowledge, cogito ergo sum, being the core result,, anything stemming from this can be manipulated. and from the empiricist side well then nothing cannot exist, as everything can be viewed by everyone with different properties; the concept is similar to that of god, we know what god should be yet we cannot describe what it is. this is what i mean by the concept and the actuality. the concept itself exists so the actuality must exist for the concept to come from, even a warped view of religion ( which i think is Marxist theory at its perfection). we know the concept of atoms, we cannot see to the naked eye however we can know they exist. so we can know the concept of something exists, as we think of it so it follows that he actuality also must exist for the concept to spring from

0 Replies

Some are assuming that because they cant see nothing that it is not there.

0 Replies

Hi All,
Here is another avenue for you to pursue. If "Nothing" did exist, it would cancel out "Everything" or "Every thing". In the future "Nothing" can never exist, for it would illiminate the history of that that came prior to it. Once there has been "something" there can never be "Nothing". The "Something" has been (Here and now). Therefore, even as mere historic residue, If "Something has existed, it, forever, prevents "Nothing" from existing.
Thank you all, best wishes to you.
Mark...

4 Replies

@mark noble,

Wow! I had read it a couple times, but I think that is sound. I need to think more...The only thing that still makes this a little fuzzy to me is that by that argument, we would have no idea what nothingness actually is, since it's never existed.

0 Replies

@mark noble,

Ok, I think I get it. It doesn't rely on the concept of nothingness, but on the opposite. The next question is: what is unending?

1 Reply

@mark noble,

You argument is biased. You could just as easily argue there is no something because there is no nothing to identify against. How do you have something if there is no nothing ?

1 Reply

@mark noble,

mark noble wrote:

Once there has been "something" there can never be "Nothing". The "Something" has been (Here and now).
Mark...

The same can be said about the opposite, if there ever was "nothing" how could "something" have sprouted form it?

I think you're also right in saying that "nothing" and "something" cannot exist together, they would cancel each-other out. What the real question is : are we and all that is around us and all that we perceive "something" or "nothing"?

1 Reply

@Homomorph,

Homomorph wrote:

Ok, I think I get it. It doesn't rely on the concept of nothingness, but on the opposite. The next question is: what is unending?

Hi Homomorph,
Nice to see you, indeed.
What is unending? you say. IMO=Everything.
Have a brilliant day.
Mark...

0 Replies

@Ionus,

Hi lonus,
I CAN only have something if there is no nothing, if there was no thing (nothing), I couldn't have some thing (something), because the nothing would prevent the something from being some thing. Only in the absence of nothing can something apply.
Best wishes.
Mark...

1 Reply

@Jack Tripper,

Hi Jack,
I think we should, for sanity's sake, comply with the standard model on this one. We are 'Something'. If we were 'Nothing' we wouldn't have the ability to define ourselves, or have this conversation.
Thank you Jack, and have a great day...
Mark...

0 Replies

ONLY IF YOU DON'T KNOW IF IT IS THERE!!!!!
how easy is the question! and all you people look into it to deeply
jezz! wait...is that a real answer?
ask a simple question give a simple answer.
remember that. if he wants a elaberent answer he should of asked a longer question

1 Reply

@Briteone,

Is elaberent a word? or is it just spelled wrong
or it could be nothing? but if you understand its meaning then it must be a word
so therefore it is something and it just came into existance
does one have to spell correctly to be intelligent?

0 Replies

@mark noble,

Well Logically yes, nothing is something because we know about it, we can see it because we can determine when its there by removing everything from an area. We can hear it by not saying anything or removing all the noise from an area. We can taste it by not putting anything into our mouthes etc etc. So nothing CAN exist WHEN we want it to.

0 Replies

I've still been thinking about this for a while, and it's become pretty disconcerting. Mark's argument makes sense, at least to me, but it does rely on our general definitions. The scary thing is that without convention with general definition, we couldn't communicate (obviously), but raising this question seems to ask for more precision than we are capable of giving because of the inherent incompleteness of our conventional definitions, which terrifies me!

1 Reply

@Homomorph,

Quote:

The scary thing is that without convention with general definition, we couldn't communicate (obviously), but raising this question seems to ask for more precision than we are capable of giving because of the inherent incompleteness of our conventional definitions, which terrifies me!

You need to spend more time in combat.

0 Replies

@mark noble,

Your argument is silly in the litteral meaning of silly, a wheel that doesnt run true.

Quote:

Only in the absence of nothing can something apply.

And in the abscence of something, nothing can apply. What exists in between galaxies ? What exists in between sub-atomic particles ? There is far more nothing than something. Something exists because there is so much nothing. If everything was something, movement would be impossible, like some gellatous mass clogging everything.

1 Reply

DOES NOTHING EXIST???

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know