On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:

> As for the remark about nothingness having only one way of being and there
> being a lot more ways of existing, it's cute, but it's sophistry. Non-being
> is not a countable way of being.
> I agree.

Hi Bruno, what do you agree with exactly? That non-being is not being is
obvious but irrelevant. The real question here is whether nothing and the
multiple "somethings" can be put in the same collection in a non-arbitrary
way. And they can: the collection of elements created by removing "things"
from one another. And "nothing" is one of these elements.

It's the absence of being - obviously - so can't be presented as one among
> a myriad of possible configurations of the universe.
> I never claimed that "nothing" is a possible configuration of the
universe. All I said is that there are more ways of being than of
non-being, which is obviously true, in the same way that there is just one
zero, but many positive integers.


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