I'll try to find it. It was yet another thread by MR bashing religion, and since neither you nor Yazata sided with MR, he had a go at you both.
10 Great Questions of Philosophy
- Thread starter Magical Realist
- Start date
I'll try to find it. It was yet another thread by MR bashing religion, and since neither you nor Yazata sided with MR, he had a go at you both.
Because something has the capacity to manifest things from the sub-atomic to the macro , and all the chemistry , bio-chemistry , physics , particle-physics and astrophysics that there is and will be
Nothing is the complete and absolute opposite of something
Nothing has NO dimension , movement (time as some perfer ) , depth , breadth
And nothing therefore can not evolve INTO something
Hence why there is something instead of nothing
So there was always something ?
Absolutely
To me this is the most interesting question, and one I think is deeply under-appreciated in general. And the answers to the other questions of course depend greatly on how a person deals with this one.
.. and your earlier post hinges around this, I would say;
And nothing therefore can not evolve INTO something
None of which touches the question, WHY, in the first place, something instead of nothing.
I'm not saying I disagree, and that I'm a nihilist or something. But the question remains untouched. WHY something instead of nothing. Obviously, we have something, so that's something, but .. why ?
'Why not' doesn't answer it.
Essentially I feel you are right... it is the only question and all other questions stem from this [ex-nihilo]
It is after all the first premise/answer that determines all others IMO.
I tend to feel that it is the issue of accepting the existence [ non-existent existence actually ] of zero or nothingness that is the key to discovering this truth.
Example:
You take a 12 inch ruler made of timber and you seek it's center [center of mass/gravity]. You know the center exists yet regardless of how much reduction you apply you will never actually find it, Yet you must pass through it to get to the other side of the ruler.
So zero exists as immaterial and doesn't exist as material. In fact one could state That "Zero is the only non-existent "thing" in this universe".
Zero is definitely a paradox of existence/non-existence and is the only "thing" that provides constancy/order/non-chaos/consistency of all values. IMO
Accepting the reality of a fundamental paradox is half way to solving the riddle ... [Existence itself is in fact the solution to the paradox IMO]
To help, ask the question:
Does the center of gravity of any given object of mass actually exist?
Last edited:
This , ex-nihilo perspective is not a reasonable and then follows , logic , neither a logical question
If you think that ex-nihilo is the starting point , then develop a theory upon non-existence as the starting point , of the Universe
It is after all the first premise/answer that determines all others IMO.
I tend to feel that it is the issue of accepting the existence [ non-existent existence actually ] of zero or nothingness that is the key to discovering this truth.
Example:
You take a 12 inch ruler made of timber and you seek it's center [center of mass/gravity]. You know the center exists yet regardless of how much reduction you apply you will never actually find it, Yet you must pass through it to get to the other side of the ruler.
So zero exists as immaterial and doesn't exist as material. In fact one could state That "Zero is the only non-existent "thing" in this universe".
Zero is definitely a paradox of existence/non-existence and is the only "thing" that provides constancy/order/non-chaos/consistency of all values. IMO
Accepting the reality of a fundamental paradox is half way to solving the riddle ... [Existence itself is in fact the solution to the paradox IMO]
To help, ask the question:
Does the center of gravity of any given object of mass actually exist?
No
Because gravity has nothing to do with zero or non-existence
Essentially I feel you are right... it is the only question and all other questions stem from this [ex-nihilo]
It is after all the first premise/answer that determines all others IMO.
I tend to feel that it is the issue of accepting the existence [ non-existent existence actually ] of zero or nothingness that is the key to discovering this truth.
Example:
You take a 12 inch ruler made of timber and you seek it's center [center of mass/gravity]. You know the center exists yet regardless of how much reduction you apply you will never actually find it, Yet you must pass through it to get to the other side of the ruler.
So zero exists as immaterial and doesn't exist as material. In fact one could state That "Zero is the only non-existent "thing" in this universe".
Zero is definitely a paradox of existence/non-existence and is the only "thing" that provides constancy/order/non-chaos/consistency of all values. IMO
Accepting the reality of a fundamental paradox is half way to solving the riddle ... [Existence itself is in fact the solution to the paradox IMO]
To help, ask the question:
Does the center of gravity of any given object of mass actually exist?
The centre of gravity of said ruler is a plane - 2 dimensional. You could ask the same question about any 2D plane in it - same question. And in fact, you could ask it of any 1D line of that plane.
An infinity of 'nothings' make something one D up ..
Arrgghh ..
(I don't know what to think)
Because Nothing for infinity could never manifest anything , for nothing also has no space ( room to allow manifestation of anything to become on any level , from the sub-atomic to the macro )
So you just offer a contra with out supporting it?
Is that how to have a discussion?
Never said ex-nihilo creation was a starting point.
What I did say was that by understanding the paradox of nothingness [ zero] both existing and non-existing one has the ability to start to grasp the nature of ex-nihilo in the "eternal" present present moment.
The example give is about a 3 dimensional object called a ruler. common usage.. probably have one on your desk. Your desk is also a 3 dimensional object , with a center of gravity [ mass ]. In fact any/evey object of mass has a center of gravity.
Do you dispute this fact of existence?
The center of gravity can NOT be ascertained exactly due to infinite reduction. This creates inherent instability of all things. It is impossible to balance things exactly [Micro scale] thus absolute rest is impossible in this universe and the uncertainty Principle is a natural outcome.
"Where exactly is the center of gravity of a cloud or the sun or the moon or the Lagrangian point between the Earth and the sun?"
What value does it have?
Does it exist ?
Well have you developed a theory where non-existence is your starting point ? No you haven't
Your theory of zero is actually based on something , not nothing
It is based on nothing within the substance of something , non-sequitur
So gravity to you is based on geometry ?
yep certainly have, and one that is axiomatic , self evident and all encompassing.
"Contradiction!" QQ yells at the Judge.
I have no theory but now I apparently you acknowledge I have a theory on zero!
Make up your mind! which is it to be?
exactly! You got it... a paradox and definitely non-sequitur.... However universal reality is the teller of this story not me.. Go look and thou shall find...!
nope
The one you witness and experience every day of your life...