OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Mon 21 Nov, 2011 04:08 pm
@guigus,

OmSigDAVID wrote:


OmSigDAVID wrote:

Quote:
DOES NOTHING EXIST???
Does a dream exist ?





David
guigus wrote:
No, the dreams you remember having were all just a dream.
Thank u. Will u reveal the source of your information on this point ?





David
guigus wrote:
Well, let me see... Try reading this:

http://crowdleaks.org/money-creation-banking-system-occupy-wall-street/

Then tell me what you think, so I can perhaps direct you to other sources.
Is that about dreaming or banking ??
guigus
 
  1  
Mon 21 Nov, 2011 05:26 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:


OmSigDAVID wrote:


OmSigDAVID wrote:

Quote:
DOES NOTHING EXIST???
Does a dream exist ?





David
guigus wrote:
No, the dreams you remember having were all just a dream.
Thank u. Will u reveal the source of your information on this point ?





David
guigus wrote:
Well, let me see... Try reading this:

http://crowdleaks.org/money-creation-banking-system-occupy-wall-street/

Then tell me what you think, so I can perhaps direct you to other sources.
Is that about dreaming or banking ??


They are the same.

Sorry, let me explain my post about dreaming: if you deny the existence of dreams, then you must take their existence for a dream. But then at least the dream of their existence must exist...

So I suggest you not only accept the existence of dreams, but also wake up from them, including the nightmare of our current monetary system.
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  2  
Mon 21 Nov, 2011 06:27 pm
Pardon my obscurantism but since I consider everything and nothing to be two sides of the same coin, and since I consider everything's existance to be self-evident I necessarily affirm the existence of nothing-ness.
Lustig Andrei
 
  1  
Mon 21 Nov, 2011 07:00 pm
@JLNobody,
Sorry, JL, but the moment you say "Nothing is ...[etc. ]" it is, technically no longer nothing. It has become something -- a concept, an idea, a topic of conversation. Pure nothing simply is not.
JPLosman0711
 
  1  
Mon 21 Nov, 2011 07:48 pm
@guigus,
It doesn't take long to see that there is no 'society'.

'Society'(the word) is a combination of characteristics used to define a large group of people, it is just a word. If 'society' is just a word, there couldn't possibly be any possibility/impossibility of it. Words to not have necessities.

Money only has value so long as we all agree it does.

It is imaginary, like the Boogey Man.
Procrustes
 
  1  
Mon 21 Nov, 2011 09:04 pm
@JPLosman0711,
It kinda begs the question "Why are we suckered into agreeance?"
JPLosman0711
 
  1  
Mon 21 Nov, 2011 09:09 pm
@Procrustes,
Good question.

I'd say that 'we'(using 'we' from the standpoint of who is here and now) almost 'trick' ourselves into agreement for the sake of proving that which cannot be proved. Which is our very existence. That is to say the existence of awareness, the you that knows 'you'.

The seemingly un-escape-able illusory duality of 'you' and your 'self'.

'Agreement' proves the existence of the one who made the original assertion.
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  2  
Mon 21 Nov, 2011 11:32 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
I think I said "it" (nothing) is everything. Keep in mind that my reference to nothing with "it" is a function of our language, not my thinking.
JPLosman0711
 
  1  
Tue 22 Nov, 2011 02:34 pm
@JLNobody,
Then why not use 'you' instead of 'nothing' or 'it'?
0 Replies
 
north
 
  1  
Wed 23 Nov, 2011 12:58 am
nothing does not exist in the Universe because the state of nothing , is infinite in its form and state

inotherwords , nothing is empty of any and all types of energy and forms , for infinity
Procrustes
 
  1  
Wed 23 Nov, 2011 01:01 am
@north,
Not to sound presumptuous but how does one know what nothing is?
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Wed 23 Nov, 2011 01:06 am
@north,
Agreeing with the idea and not with the chosen words North...
...nothing has not a state nor it has a form...you cannot instance nothingness in absolute as a thing with a state and a form, the use of the term refers to the absence of stuff that exits, therefore being relative to what exists and somewhat is absent at a given time...now to settle things down, nothingness as nothingness cannot refer nor can it be described if not as an opposition to what there is...same is to say there is n´t no such thing as an absolute nothingness...in absolute, nothingness is not...nothingness is nothing at all !

...someone should explain that to some pop scientists around that in order to keep up with the media at all costs sell this kind of confusing ideas to common folk...Steven Hawking is making a name for stupidity in that department !

Regards>FILIPE DE ALBUQUERQUE
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Wed 23 Nov, 2011 02:30 pm
@Procrustes,
Procrustes wrote:
Not to sound presumptuous but how does one know what nothing is?
One must find that all THINGS
r excluded therefrom.





David
Procrustes
 
  1  
Thu 24 Nov, 2011 03:19 am
@OmSigDAVID,
An absence of all things does not presuppose knowing nothing cos it seems counterintuitive to say that one can 'know nothing'. But that doesn't stop us trying to define it. (which is half the fun; the other half is dismantling ones own definitions to continue reworking a definition)
0 Replies
 
north
 
  0  
Sat 26 Nov, 2011 12:52 am
@Procrustes,
Procrustes wrote:

Not to sound presumptuous but how does one know what nothing is?


nothing is the absolute opposite of something , in the sense of energy and matter

although nothing can and does exist in terms of physical possessions , in the accounting sense . so that not being in possession of a thing , does not imply therefore that the thing does not exist , in literal terms
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Sat 26 Nov, 2011 01:05 am

When I meditate, I contemplate darkness (the absence of light)
and silence (the absence of sound).





David
0 Replies
 
north
 
  1  
Sat 26 Nov, 2011 01:08 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:

Agreeing with the idea and not with the chosen words North...
...nothing has not a state nor it has a form...you cannot instance nothingness in absolute as a thing with a state and a form, the use of the term refers to the absence of stuff that exits, therefore being relative to what exists and somewhat is absent at a given time...


no Fil

whether nothing exists is NOT based on absence of stuff , and therefore relative to what exists and somewhat is absent at a given time

my approach to nothing is what it can't do

if what seems , appears to be nothing , but behaves like something , then this so called " nothing " was never nothing in the first place , it was something we didn't understand yet





Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Sat 26 Nov, 2011 02:42 am
@north,
Re-read your last sentence twice and you will see that you are agreeing with me in between those confusing sentences of yours...that is that there is no Absolute nothingness, as you said nothingness is nothing in the first place !
(oh and by the way nothing does n´t behave at all)
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Sat 26 Nov, 2011 08:02 am
I think it's a little funny that you guys keep talking about "nothing" as a thing, instead of as a meaning....
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Sat 26 Nov, 2011 09:11 am
@Cyracuz,
Not the case at least concerning myself, actually I am trying to make the opposite point precisely, of course although I also think that in absolute terms nothingness can´t have any possible meaning as well Cyr...
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 12/27/2024 at 02:18:49