On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 10:47 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:

>  On 1/31/2012 8:43 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
> Regarding the "philosopher's nothing":
> This present moment exists, and it has no cause since our universe is a
> four dimensional structure (time is a subjective phenomenon).  This
> timeless existence of this moment establishes that "nothingness" cannot
> exist.  In short: It is an impossible state.  The question then becomes:
> "Why should this present moment exist, and what else might also exist?"  So
> far, the answer suggested by our latest discoveries and reasoning suggests:
> a lot.
> Jason
> Or to paraphrase Quine: What is there? Everything. So what isn't there?
> Nothing.
> Brent

I don't quite agree with that paraphrasing.  My point was that there is no
such thing as a philosopher's nothing, not that everything exists.  Such a
leap would require the additional assumption that "Nothingness" is only
thing that does not exist.  All I said was that "nothingness" is an
impossible state.  This is the conclusion of accepting a
four-dimensional/atemporal existence, as suggested by relativity.


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 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to