@JLNobody,
There is only 'you', Be-ing.
You claim in your posts that 'there are no things' and yet you seem to speaking as if 'what' you are speaking to were, in fact, some sort of 'thing'.
There cannot be 'that which simultaneously exists and doesn't exist', if that were so then 'you' couldn't exist at all. There is only you(existing), there is no 'entity' that sometimes represents you(doesn't exist).
You keep misinterpreting your 'self' as if 'it' were some 'thing' you can find within the world, this is why your posts are just a bunch of 'blabber' that you try to 'sell'.
). The existing and non existing oscillation of reality is like the behaviour of photons in a way (dual natures); but if we are to be concerned about physical reality itself, who is to say what lies outside the ripples in this pond of ours? Although it might be highly unlikely that there would be this 'brick wall' or 'interwoven blanket' of nothingness that surrounds or permeates everything respectively, the possiblity is surely to be considered, as you say, in the static abstract constructs of our own making. In my opinion, language does not give any justification to the reality of their being 'nothing', nor does thinking about it. If nothing is something and something is nothing, then isn't it better that we hold onto something while we are alive? (By the way, I agree with your idea of processes, but I'm intrigued but what you mean when you use the word)
