this is absurd

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

Are possibilities themselves something nothingness cannot be? Are all possibilities something? What is left for the possibility of nothingness itself? Is it impossible to make up possiblities for nothingness that still exist in true nothingness?

Is the concept the limit of possibility? No possibilities exist in nothingness? Why aren’t possibilities already complete in nothingness?

Something like: True nothingness cannot have possibilities – possibilities are something - therefore ALL possibilities are complete…

I’ve yet to describe what it means for the ‘possibilities to be complete’ maybe that’s unanswerable.

I have no reason to discard this idea. If you have reason to believe it’s wrong I’m dying to know.

2

Only what exists has possibilities. Only that which has a temporal character.

Nothing, like the concept of soemthing, are concepts expressing an absolute.
Absolutes do not have possibilities.
Therefore they are absurd.

There is no such state as nothing, as there is no such state as something.

3

but you can be something, just not THE state of ‘something’.

I can’t see how the state of Nothing has more than One state. So if there is a state of nothing it is THE state of nothing.

4

No you can’t.

There is no such thing as a thing.

Nothing and Something is the same absent.
You are not a being but a becoming. You are a towards a process.

5

There Is only ONE state of nothing. If something is Nothing, and truly is nothing, it is that One state.

6
  1. true
  2. untrue
7

Another absolutist thinker.

Still trying to save yourself from the void.

I love dualistic thinking.
It’s so simple.

8

what void ? there is NO void to me

9

Energy is temporal. It exists.
Matter is a comparison of temporal speeds.
What is hard is slower in changing in relation to the observer.
Energy is what is faster to change in relation to the observer.

10

sure but that does not imply that time is the " reason " for the speed of matter

11

What?
Matter is time manifest.

The substantiality of matter, it’s hardness, its mas is a temporal effect.
It’s a comparison between observe and observed.

You believe matter is a substance? How is it infinitely divisible, then?

12

of course matter is a substance just as energy is

who says that matter is infinitely divisible ? not me

13

You beleive in the atomo? The indivisible particle?

Enough said…have a nice day.

14

same

15

Any definition we give to ‘nothingness’ gives it existent properties.
If we say ‘nothingness cannot have any properties’ we are giving it a limitation. But is it not unlimited? Aren’t limitations a sort of existent thing?
Therefor, doesn’t nothingness have no limits?
I would say it is unlimited. But true non-dual limitlessness.
Limited unlimitedness is unlimitedness which is LIMITED from being limited.
In other words, nothingness is not limited to having no properties. There is no restrictive property which holds it back from having properties. There is nothing whithin nothingness which says “I cannot have any properties”.
Nothingness is NONDISTINCT.
It is not different from existence. Only distinct THINGS are different from other THINGS. There is not anything different from nothingness. Nothingness is therefor simultaneously nothing and everything at the same time. If you try and think of absolutely everything, a true everything must also include nothingness. When this happens, one breaks the division and you have pure being, or essence, which is beyond existence and non-existence.

Here is a question to help clarify that point.
What is the difference between nothingness and somethingness?
Does this difference exist or not exist? If nothingness doesn’t exist, then there is nothing which is different than somethingness.
At the same time, if there were no nothingness, we wouldn’t be able to know that there is somethingness.
We are only able to notice something when it is contrasted by something else. If you were in a world which was 100% white, and that is all you had ever known or experienced, you would not recognize it. But once another color comes about, suddenly it is differenciated in your mind. It exists to you then.

Nothingness is always a paradox when it is attempted to be understood with language, because language is inherently dualistically limited, while essence is not.

How do we know anything about nothingness if it isn’t something?

16

How can you know something about what does not exist?
What do you know about nothingness?

17

I know nothing at all.
How do you know it doesn’t exist? Does that mean you have knowledge in regards to it?
How do you know nothing is nothing, except by having knowledge of nothingness?

18

Absolutes absolutely don’t exist?
Is time subject to time?
In a lake, what exists between the limit of the last molecule of water and the limit of the first molecule of air?
If you say that someone is always subject to time, can you define someone without being circular and without allowing a counter-argument?
Isn’t the notion of state just a rethorical resource?

19

I deduce it from analyzing the world. It moves, it is unstable, it changes, it is change. therefore, I deduce, that there is no absolute, for if there were it would not change, not move and be inertly stabler.

I only have experience with time. I conclude that all else, which I have no knowledge of and no experience with, is unlikely if not impossible.

I do not project behind the world what I have no reason to and which is not necessary.
I percive no beginnings and no ends, and so I do not hope them into existence. I recognize that they are human inventions caused by how the human mind works.
I perceive no core, no thing-in-itself and so I do not suppose it into existence but see it as this need of the human mind to escape uncertainty and its own essence. It is a primordial drive towards the absolute and so the mind idealizes what it most craves.
I perceive no absolutes and so I do not beleive in them.
This means that absolute soemthing, as absolute nothing are really references to the same thing, the same absent, given a different nuance by the human mind.

If there were an absolute there would be no existence, since the definition of existence is that which has a temporal character, a phenomenon, the apparent, the flowing, the ever-changing, the forever decaying and changing, (I know not of any other) and this gives it a spatial dimension as a projection of its possibilities as a flowing.

The absolute, is the opposite of this.
Unchanging, unmoving, inert, inactive, stable, perfect, timeless, spaceless, and so on. All definitions of non-existence.

non-existence is a human invention, it has no real meaning, which negates the experience of existence.
It does this by proposing an artificial opposite, based on dualistic thinknig.
It does this to make existence comprehensible.

If existence is flow, then the awakening to it, the consciousness of it, is need/suffering.
Life/suffering one and the same.
Suffering, the extreme case of need, is the awakening to itself of a piece of temporality that has organized itself to an extent that it becomes aware.

This ordering is a reaction, a resistance, to the forever disordering.
This is why mortality is characterized by a decomposition a decay.

Time flows in all directions but can only be perceived and organized in one, because organizing is only possible towards temporal disordering.
So life is only possible as this forever decaying, resisting the temporal flows affects on it, emerging unity.

20

Existence is temporal.
Nothing exists between molecules.
A unity is this detachment this delineation between different temporal speeds, causing a division, an emerging unity which cuts away, monetarily, ordered itself (if it is life) and then looks back on the flow recognizing itself there.

A molecule of water, in a river flowing on, due to the effects and interactions of the molecules around it begins spinning in on itself, creating a momentary differentiation of its speed in relation to its background.
If within this spinning the molecule orders somewhat, it becomes alive. It can now focus its spinning energies towards directions and it attempts to establish this detachment from the flowing interactions.