Useless question, why is there something instead of nothing?

[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Dye5BmmEdco&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Dye5BmmEdco&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]
 
immortalitylost said:
Nothing is something.
Click to expand...

Not by definition.

If it can be conceptualized, well then, it isn't nothing is it?
Click to expand...

If something is conceptualized positively -- which is to say, in terms of specific attributes -- then of course that must be something.

However, nothing is conceptualized negatively. It is defined as no-thing, or "not anything". Because of that, it doesn't have to refer to something at all.


eudaimonia,

Mark
 
Yes, but we have a concept of what nothing is don't we. If we can have a concept, and visualize that concept for what nothing is, then it isn't nothing. By definition it is. But in practice it isn't. Not trying to debate really. Just my two cents.
 
immortalitylost said:
Yes, but we have a concept of what nothing is don't we.
Click to expand...

Okay, to sum up my view:

The concept of nothing is something: a concept.

The referent of the concept "nothing" is not something.

One should not confuse a concept for its referent, e.g., concept of "dog" is something you think, not something you can feed and pet.


eudaimonia,

Mark
 
I C what ur sayin. But I still think that we couldn't conceptualize nothing if nothing wasn't something. Like you can conceptualize a dog, because there is a such a thing as a dog. You can conceptualize nothing, because there is nothing. And if nothing is, then it is something. So it isn't nothing. If there were such a thing as a 'true nothing' We wouldn't even be able to conceptualize it. Like trying to conceptualize the act of not existing. It can't really be done. We can't wrap our brains around what it would be like to not exist. Kinda like that.

Doesn't really matter tho... I just enjoy debating. :)
 
nothing can denote something, like in an absence is not a presence, but the absence of someone can palpably be felt as a presence missed, or a negation indicates a not as opposed to an is, and lets not forget the place holder naught a necessary number in its own right in mathematics.
 
That is what I mean, how else can nothing be so important unless it equates to something.
 
Well maybe susma rio will pop back into their thread and say something interesting, but perhaps this striving after nothing is deemed a waste of time and energy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top