Is there such a thing as no thing?

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Even when it doesn't physically exist, naming anything gives it identity. It's a "thing" in our mind. You proved it by describing it.

Then, by your definition, you DO believe in God. Otherwise you could not describe God if He didn't exist. Hmmm, rather circular.

1 Reply

@Intrepid,

I didn't say anything about believing anything just because it has an identity. You stretch your imagination too much, and arrive at stupid conclusions.

1 Reply

@kennethamy,

Agreed. That is why I barely post here.

1 Reply

@Ding an Sich,

Have you any idea how close to ridiculous that comment is ???
Independently of it being true the fact that you find any usefulness on such statement only shows how vain and naive is your foundation...

Find yourselves a TV commercial if your looking to publicize how good you are...modern scholastics with the usual expected mediocrity and but kissing...

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

I didn't say anything about believing anything just because it has an identity. You stretch your imagination too much, and arrive at stupid conclusions.

You seem to be having some difficulty in understanding what you wrote. Look at your post again and then tell me you didn't say that.

1 Reply

@kennethamy,

kennethamy wrote:

CalamityJane wrote:

Hah! Just today I wondered what happened to the hard core philis .....

Gresham's law also applies to philosophy forums. Bad philosophy drives out good.

Would you be so kind as to provide direction to the good? It seems to be rather evasive.

0 Replies

@Intrepid,

Since you are so dense in the understanding of the English language, I'll repeat it for you again:

Quote:

Even when it doesn't physically exist, naming anything gives it identity. It's a "thing" in our mind. You proved it by describing it.

Where does it say I believe in the "thing?" I said it gives it an identity, and provides and identity in our mind with it. God is a good example, but if you have been reading my posts all over a2k, you would know that I am an atheist. I don't believe in any mythical god(s) - even if many people do. Some like you do, but that's your problem. There's a world a difference that you can't seem to decipher.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Since you are so dense in the understanding of the English language, I'll repeat it for you again:

Quote:
Even when it doesn't physically exist, naming anything gives it identity. It's a "thing" in our mind. You proved it by describing it.

Where does it say I believe in the "thing?" I said it gives it an identity, and provides and identity in our mind with it. God is a good example, but if you have been reading my posts all over a2k, you would know that I am an atheist. I don't believe in any mythical god(s) - even if many people do. Some like you do, but that's your problem. There's a world a difference that you can't seem to decipher.

The courtesy that you display on these threads is second to none.

I know you are an atheist. That is my point on what you wrote.
I am not talking about your posts on other threads, I am talking about this one.

You still don't get what you wrote because you are blinded by the word God. You could replace God with any other word and what you wrote would still have the same meaning.

1 Reply

@Intrepid,

You're the one missing "the point." What I have posted is clear and concise. You are the one who is confused.

Just because something has a description, doesn't mean we "believe" it.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Quote:

Even when it doesn't physically exist, naming anything gives it identity. It's a "thing" in our mind. You proved it by describing it.

Does a thing in our mind mean the same as believing it is a thing????

1 Reply

@Intrepid,

Not necessarily; but think god. Many people believe in god(s), but it's a thing nobody is able to describe - even though the bible says "man is made in his image."

If you believe that, you'll believe almost anything!

Do you believe in the tooth fairy?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Do you believe in trolls?

Everything is directed to your atheism with you. Your hatred of God and anyone who holds him dear blinds you to reality and courteous discourse.

2 Replies

@Intrepid,

Intrepid wrote:

Do you believe in trolls?

Everything is directed to your atheism with you. Your hatred of God and anyone who holds him dear blinds you to reality and courteous discourse.

god and the devil are not no things

there has been evidence of " space craft " in paintings for hundreds of yrs

hence god , its just that the devil hitched a ride

0 Replies

@Intrepid,

I know about trolls; having just returned from Norway, images of trolls are everywhere. No live ones have been sighted, but there are plenty of descriptions on trolls.

If you wish to see trolls, visit my Norway travelogue at travelpod.com. I'm under c.i.222.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

I know about trolls; having just returned from Norway, images of trolls are everywhere. No live ones have been sighted, but there are plenty of descriptions on trolls.

If you wish to see trolls, visit my Norway travelogue at travelpod.com. I'm under c.i.222.

No need to travel. Plenty of trolls on A2K.

1 Reply

@Intrepid,

That only limits your world view.

0 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

Have you any idea how close to ridiculous that comment is ???
Independently of it being true the fact that you find any usefulness on such statement only shows how vain and naive is your foundation...

Find yourselves a TV commercial if your looking to publicize how good you are...modern scholastics with the usual expected mediocrity and but kissing...

Well my foundation is in flux at the moment. So you could say that I am foundation-less. There is nothing "vain" or "naive" about my attitude. I am simply holding my tongue.

I never said I was good; perhaps I was implying it. There is no reason for me to post here addressing issues that are deemed worth dicussing, precisely because it will end up in people not knowing what they are talking about; what I have noticed for some time now is that the forum has become stagnant and the same questions seem to arise over and over again without any conclusive answer. I think we have at least three threads discussing identity and a couple addressing whether nothing is a thing or not, or whether or not it has properties. I'm pretty sure these problems have already been solved via logic, so why continue to go around in circles? I must be missing something.

I actually despise television and have no intention of publicizing anything, least of all how "good" I am, whatever that may be.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Even when it doesn't physically exist, naming anything gives it identity. It's a "thing" in our mind. You proved it by describing it.

Not so.
(Vulcan)=(Vulcan), is false.. because Vulcan does not exist.
(the present king of France)=(the present king of France), is false..
because it does not exist.

x=x iff x exists.
Non-referring names/descriptions are not self identical.

It is false to say that all proper names denote, "Vulcan" and "Pegasus" are examples of failure.
It is provably false to say that 'the present king of France' is equal to itself.

To give it identity, is to give it some property, therefore it exists.

cicerone imposter:
"You proved it (that it is a thing) by describing it."

This is also false.
You have proven there is a description of it by describing it, nothing else.

1 Reply

@Reyn,

Reyn wrote:

Hmmm, didn't you ask this question before?

Yup, you did! Wink

mark noble wrote:

As simple as that.........DOES NOTHING EXIST???
In your opinion - does nothing exist, has it ever existed, can it ever exist? ...

http://able2know.org/topic/152965-1#post-4173179

0 Replies

@Owen phil,

Unfortunately people often confuse the concept with the thing to which the concept refers...in the case it gets even worse since the concept when rationalized by its own definition does not refer to anything...Understandably it must n´t, once it clearly states no-thing.

Now the question further develops on trying to understand how can a concept not refer if all concepts must refer...how can the trick be done in the mind ?

In the case is my opinion that this "No-Thing" by abstraction refers to that which was never seen, never eared, never thought...to no memory !
Therefore by that which is sort of "designed" on the surrounded void created by all that is and can be conceptualized of...
...and such, goes and goes gradually on the mind, in a process that working like a shadow is drawn and chasten by the entirety of those things, that we can think of at any moment as laying around that very same nothingness, thus slowly, starting to bring "to life", the illusory projection of an emptiness with shape...

...As I said, a mistake in the mind, and for the mind if one does n´t mind...

0 Replies

Is there such a thing as no thing?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know