@Arjuna,
Arjuna wrote:
mark noble wrote:
Hi Arjuna!
Every thing is an example of 'not cow' with the exception of 'cows', of course.
But if we answered every question 'what is that?', it is 'not cow'. Then we wouldn't really be doing anybody's education any justice.
'Nobody' as an expression, certainly exists. It is 'nobody' the thing that does not. Nobody, I'm sure you'll agree, is not a thing, it is an expression used to convey the absence of a thing.
To sum up - Nobody is present never in the physical realm, for nobody has no properties. Nobody cannot prove that this is false or correct because nobody is incapable of proving anything.
Best wishes Arjuna!
Mark...
Very true.
But mustn't you grant me that although it may not serve any educational purpose it's still true:
everything other than cows is the not-cow.
Does anything follow from that? Maybe the question is: could a cow exist if there was no not-cow?
If everything was green, would we know the meaning of the word: green?
And I had another day with the occasional brilliant moment. Hope you did too!
Hi Arjuna!
Everything other than 'cow' is 'not cow'? I agree.
There is a thread here, when time permits.
For there to be a 'not cow' a cow could 'not exist', but I would assume that a 'cow' must have, at least, ONCE existed - for the name 'cow' to have any realistic meaning to it.
Yes. If everything was green - green would = everything. so 'everything' would have the definition of 'green', but it would not be comparable to anything, so technically, it wouldn't require a definition.
There's another thread here!
I'm glad the good moments crawl out of the woodwork in amongst the not good ones, for you.
I have stopped urinating pure blood for a day or two, and am cheerful for this. My mind is always happy though.
Kind regards!
Mark...
