How do you not see that this is what I’m trying to do? Here’s a summery of what’s happened. Tell me which part you disagree with:
C: My argument is that if we believe Existence to be imperfect, we run into the paradox of something (our conception of Perfection) coming from non-existence/nothing.
S: We cannot conceive of Perfection because we are imperfect beings
C: We are also finite beings. Given your line of reasoning, will you be consistent and say that we cannot conceive of Infinity?
S: Yes. We are finite beings therefore we cannot conceive of Infinity.
C: So if we cannot conceive of Infinity, then this means that Existence is necessarily finite. This logically implies that there was once no x (Existence) and then there was x (Existence). This is absurd and unacceptable. However saying x (Existence) always existed is not paradoxical or absurd. It is clearly acceptable. It is clearly understandable. Therefore we understand Infinity and Existence Is clearly Infinite.
S: Your definition of existence/something and nothing/non-existence is outdated. Science shows a third way wherein which something can be not x (Existence) and yet not ‘absolute nothing’ at the same time. Science show that something can exist and yet not exist at the same time.
C: What you say is absurd. If x exits, then x exists. If x does not exist, then x does not exist. There is no x both exists and x doesn’t exist. Again, has Existence always existed? Yes or no, there is no in-between?
S: I’m tempted to just leave this post there. Every time I respond to the extraneous tangent, it takes up the whole of your response back to me, and we never actually end up covering the only thing I was trying to say in the first place.
How do you understand, that which is by definition not understandable. How do you understand that which is hypothetically impossible or paradoxical? You cannot update your definition of triangle and round for it to become such that you can now understand a round triangle. You cannot empirically observe such a thing because you cannot understand such a thing. So when you say:
and if only experiment didn’t show “something coming from nothing” happening all the time at the quantum level
Tell me how experiment can show a round triangle. Tell me how experiment can show existence coming from non-existence. You won’t be able to explain it, let alone observe it. Unlike Infinity, which you’ll be able to explain/understand, but will never be able to observe. So you tell me with sincerity, is it better to believe in 1, or 2:
- Existence has always existed and will always exist
- Existence came from non-existence and will go into, or become non-existent. Like humans turn to ashes, except imagine the ashes turning into…non-existence…absolutely nothing.