Hal Ruhl a écrit :
> Hi Georges:
> The key division of my list of possible properties of objects is: 
> [empty [read the "Nothing"]:all other properties [read my All[perhaps 
> the Everything]]].  The Nothing is incomplete [there is a meaningful 
> question it must answer but of course can not] and the All is 
> complete [the list contains itself] and thus inconsistent.  I do not 
> see a number having either property so a number can not take the 
> "place" of the Nothing and I do not see any number being able to 
> describe the Nothing - the empty string is not a number [IMO].  As 
> for the All - numbers are not internally inconsistent.  Finally, if a 
> number can not describe the Nothing then how can a number describe 
> the All which is the Nothing's "is not" partner?

I do not understand. You are considering objects that would not
have any property at all and objects that would simultaneously
have all imaginable properties?


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to