On 2/1/2012 7:57 AM, Jason Resch wrote:

On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 10:47 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net <mailto: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 
    of this moment establishes that "nothingness" cannot exist.  In short: It 
is an
    impossible state.  The question then becomes: "Why should this present 
    exist, and what else might also exist?"  So far, the answer suggested by 
our latest
    discoveries and reasoning suggests: a lot.


    Or to paraphrase Quine: What is there? Everything. So what isn't there? 


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.

I agree. But I don't think it depends on spacetime being four dimensional (which is good since it has a lot more dimensions in some theories; some even have two time dimensions). Quine didn't think that 'everything exists' as it's used on this list. He just meant 'Everything that exists is what there is'.


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