foundations of reality from six logical tautologies

(T1) Nothing is nothing. - Nothing is nonexistence. (Mars Turner)
This is a predicative truth from the law of identity.
(T2) Nothing is nonexistence. - Something is existence. (Parmenides)
This is a definitional synonym truth as well as [T1] corollary.
(T3) At no time has nothing existed. - Something has always existed. (Mars Turner)
This is a predicative truth from the definitional truth.
(T4) Nowhere does nothing exist. - Something exists everywhere. (Mars Turner)
This is a predicative truth from the definitional truth.
(T5) Nothing is made of nothing. - Everything is made of something. (Parmenides)
This is a predicative truth.
(T6) Nothing is the cause of nothing. - Something is the cause of all things. (Mars Turner)
This is a predicative truth.

http://mysiddhi.freehostia.com/spiritual/God_Geometric.html

Admirable, but still incomplete.

Are you referring to Godel’s incompleteness theorem?

That theorem is in reference to axiomatic reasoning not logical tautologies.

Ah, this loser is back.

I’ve reported this as a repost, which it is.

Mysiddhi, what does this information mean? Can you explain its implications in a practical way?

Looks like an attempted proof of the existence of a Prime Mover. However, along with several other problems, the last premise doesn’t follow from anything that precedes it, and has been merely posited out of thin air.

I’ve been starting to think lately that causation is just false. I’ll come up with something besides that blatant assertion sometime. Until then, I’ll just scream that it’s false and hope that no one screams louder than me. Isn’t that how it goes around here?

More or less. Try this - causation is accidental but not random.

More, later.

Well, it has implications for ontology as well as epistemology.

From the first two and last logical tautologies we can deduce ontological monism as a logical necessity;

(T1) Nothing is nothing. - Nothing is nonexistence. (Mars Turner)
This is a predicative truth from the law of identity.
(T2) Nothing is nonexistence. - Something is existence. (Parmenides)
This is a definitional synonym truth as well as [T1] corollary.
(T6) Nothing is the cause of nothing. - Something is the cause of all things. (Mars Turner)
This is a predicative truth.

(D1) One thing has the essence of existence (Spinoza) [monism]
Proof–The true definition of a thing neither involves nor expresses anything beyond the nature of the thing defined. From this it follows that–No definition implies or expresses a certain number of individuals, inasmuch as it expresses nothing beyond the nature of the thing defined. There is necessarily for each individual existent thing a cause why it should exist [T6]. This cause of existence must either be contained in the nature and definition of the thing defined, or must be postulated apart from such definition. If a given number of individual things exist in nature, there must be some cause for the existence of exactly that number, neither more nor less. Consequently, the cause of each of them, must necessarily be sought externally to each individual thing. It therefore follows that, everything which may consist of several individuals must have an external cause. And, as it has been shown already that existence appertains to the nature of something [T2], existence must necessarily be included in its definition; and from its definition alone existence must be deducible. But from its definition we cannot infer the existence of several things; therefore it follows that there is only one thing that has the essence of existence. Q.E.D.

Logical tautologies do not have to follow from anything that precedes them. Logical tautologies are NOT deductions. They are in themselves true without anything to support them. I connect [T1], [T2], [T3], and [T4] just in case someone cannot understand the predicative implications of the definitional synonym.

If the last two logical tautologies were false (which is impossible) nothing would be made out of something and have a cause (which is absurd).

There is nothing (if I may use that word) tautological about your last two statements, MySidd. In fact, the first of these two, “Nothing is the cause of nothing” doesn’t even make sense.

Yes, and as a correlate, nothing is the effect of nothing. :stuck_out_tongue:

You’re onto something Smears. ‘Causation’ is outdated. Follow your intuition. :wink:

Mysiddhi you made a fatal error very early in your logic.

I’ll leave you to ponder and figure it out for now… :stuck_out_tongue:

Oh, that’s right, you all probably haven’t seen mysiddhi before…he was active in the religion section and not so much in other places.

His name is mars sterling turner. Yes, that’s right: he’s the guy he credits with four of his six ‘tautologies’ that explain everything. He has a website that, among other things, ‘proves’ the existence of god, upholds that the theory that the earth is only a few thousand years old and that the flood story are scientifically provable, and demonstrates the ‘superior technology’ that he in his genius has developed such as the drawing in his avatar (he believes that by animating images that quickly switch colors in specific patterns that he can release some kind of particles or an energy field that has healthy side-effects). When he came to this site, he promoted himself as ‘something of a legend’ on the myspace philosophy forums…if you’ll read up on his legendary status, however, you’ll find that he is indeed famous…or should I say infamous. No one likes him. So he comes here to pollute this site because others have already discovered he’s an idiot.

I’ll field any questions.

:laughing:

Lol ok Anthem–thanks for the heads up. :wink:

:sunglasses:

Hmmm. I was going to google “mars turner” but I forgot. Or, well, I had the notion that all I’d find was that he proofread Colin Leslie Dean’s pornographic poetry or something.

Wasn’t far off.

Didn’t Dylan do an album called “Colin Leslie Dean”?

You said “any” questions.

All this hype about Colin Leslie Dean almost makes me want to wikipedia or google him… :evilfun:

And by “almost” I mean “not even remotely”. :imp:

Damnit…I did. I meant it in the context of my post, but I’ll give it a shot.

Maybe you’re thinking of John Wesley Harding?

Or maybe Slow Train Coming.

It means simply that; nothing has no cause. And the other; that nothing is not made of anything.

The reverse of these statements are absurdities… that nothing has a cause and that nothing is made of something.

I cannot tell what logical law makes them logical tautologies… but if they are not such what are they?