Checkmate in 3 moves

  • Thread starter Thread starter MindOverMatter2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
FurtherSuntime said:
  1. Nothing can only be the absense of something, and therefore is something…you loose:eek:
Click to expand...
Nothing is the absence of something. If this is true, how can nothing be “something” if the word symbolizes the absence of it? no, you lose…miserably:D
FurtherSuntime said:
2.Potenciality can be the means of of its own actuality…you loose:eek:
Click to expand...
This is just a meaningless assertion. Potentiality is not an actual reality. Nothing is not a being anymore so than a square is a triangle:D.
FurtherSuntime said:
  1. Third move is disqualified. you loose:thumbsup:
Click to expand...
Please tell me that this is a joke:D
 
Kismetji said:
With all due respect, no he did not.

No dogmatic huffing and puffing will change that.

Though I agree it does seem absurd.
Click to expand...
What does it mean to prove something logically if not by its distinction? To say that something can come from nothing is to remove and deny the fundamental distinction between reality and nothing. There is no rational basis for such a denial anymore than there is for saying that a triangle is a square. If reality is not nothing, then it follows necessarily that nothing is the absence of all reality including all powers and attributes of reality. The distinction is absolute. If something came from nothing, then that would contradict the fact that nothing is the absence of reality. No dogmatic huffing and puffing will change that.
 
MindOverMatter2 said:
What does it mean to prove something logically if not by its distinction? To say that something can come from nothing is to remove and deny the fundamental distinction between reality and nothing. There is no rational basis for such a denial anymore than there is for saying that a triangle is a square. If reality is not nothing, then it follows necessarily that nothing is the absence of all reality. If something came form nothing, then that would contradict the fact that nothing is the absence of reality. No dogmatic huffing and puffing will change that.
Click to expand...
Saying that reality can come from unreality is not the same as contradicting oneself. Sorry.
 
We cannot give what we don’t have. Nothing cannot give something because it never had something to give in the first place. 🙂

Silly people and their square triangles.
 
Credo_in_Deum said:
We cannot give what we don’t have. Nothing cannot give something because it never had something to give in the first place. 🙂

Silly people and their square triangles.
Click to expand...
Do you even know what nothing is?

No. And you shouldn’t presume to know something can’t come out of it.
 
Kismetji said:
Saying that reality can come from unreality is not the same as contradicting oneself. Sorry.
Click to expand...
Yes it is a contradiction. You are saying that possibility can “exist” in that which is the absence of all possibility. You are saying that something can be true of untruth. In other-words, you are saying potentiality can be an attribute of that which has no attributes. A square is a triangle.

If you cannot see the contradiction, it is because you have difficulty grasping the distinction between being and no-being.
 
Kismetji said:
Do you even know what nothing is?
Click to expand...
You don’t know what nothing is. Do not presume to know what others know.

Nothing is not a thing or object, but rather it it is a word invented to symbolize a negation of objects or things. For example, there is a bike in room A, but there is no-bike in room B. There is no thing that we understand to be a bike in room B. Thats the only meaningful way it which the word can be used. You cannot get a real bike from no-bike. You cannot get reality from a negation of reality.

**You are talking nonsense.
**
Its not difficult to understand. There is no truth in nothing. There is only truth in reality; and thus things can only be true of reality.
 
MindOverMatter2 said:
Yes it is a contradiction. You are saying that possibility can “exist” in that which is the absence of all possibility. You are saying that something can be true of untruth. In other-words, you are saying potentiality can be an attribute of that which has no attributes. A square is a triangle.

If you cannot see the contradiction, it is because you have difficulty grasping the distinction between being and no-being.
Click to expand...
If nothing is the absence of everything, you cannot even say it is an absence, because that is predicating something of nothing.

You cannot say it is “untruth” either. You have absolutely no warrant for saying anything at all about it. So how can you deny, not the possibility, but the ] that something comes from nothing?

You cannot.
 
MindOverMatter2 said:
Nothing is the absence of something. If this is true, how can nothing be “something” if the word symbolizes the absence of it? no, you lose…miserably:D

This is just a meaningless assertion. Potentiality is not an actual reality. Nothing is not a being anymore so than a square is a triangle:D.

Please tell me that this is a joke:D
Click to expand...
  1. Because nothing is also relative, otherwise it cannot be , therefore it represents a value:eek:
  2. Potenciality can express the absolute of actuality: In mind for example, pure hope:eek:
 
Again, I am not saying I agree that something comes from nothing. To me this seems counterintuitive. I just don’t understand, for the life of me, how anyone can be dead-certain that something cannot come from nothing. That is just presumption.
 
Kismetji said:
If nothing is the absence of everything, you cannot even say it is an absence, because that is predicating something of nothing.
.
Click to expand...
No it is not. To speak of an absence of something is merely to symbolize the absence of a thing rather than to speak of a thing.

You are basically saying that we cannot speak of the concept of nothing unless we say that it is a thing; which is absurd.
 
1…Theres no such thing as nothing to negotiate…check:thumbsup:
 
MindOverMatter2 said:
No it is not. To speak of an absence of something is merely to symbolize the absence of a thing rather than to speak of a thing.

You are basically saying that we cannot speak of the concept nothing unless we say that is a thing; which is absurd.
Click to expand...
An absence of a thing is not nothing! Unicorns not existing does not mean nothing exists!

So, an absence is not nothing. Neither can you say nothing amounts to an absence. That is nonsense. :rolleyes:

Nothing cannot even logically exist.
 
MindOverMatter2 said:
Why is it counterintuitive?
Click to expand...
Because I’ve always seen something new acted upon by something on prior matter. Unless someone can show me, I don’t know, some exotic matter that “poofs” into existence. Only even then I can question and open up space to assume it came from somewhere.
 
Kismetji said:
An absence of a thing is not nothing!
Click to expand...
Thats what the word nothing means!! no/thing no object.:confused:

This is not difficult.😃
Kismetji said:
Unicorns not existing does not mean nothing exists!
Click to expand...
It means no unicorns exist. Nothing is meaningless except as a negation of things
Kismetji said:
Nothing cannot even logically exist.
Click to expand...
Bingo!:rolleyes: Therefore my argument stands unrefuted.

Its surprising how you know so much about nothing when you think it will benefit you.:rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top