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.

Ricardo.

-- 
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 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to