> On 30 May 2019, at 16:54, Tomas Pales <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Thursday, May 30, 2019 at 4:14:48 PM UTC+2, Jason wrote: > > Let's say reality is composed of two sets: > > 1. The set of all existent things > 2. The set of all non-existent things > > If nothing existed at all, then set one would be emtpy, while set two would > contain everything. > > What do you mean by existent? How are existent things different from > non-existent things?
Yes, that is a bit weird. Let me give exemples of non existent thing: a unicorn with two corns, A cat is is also a dog, a saure without corner, a triangle with four sides, a proof of an inconsistency in RA, a French who is higher than Mt-Everest, etc. If mechanism is true, then an ontological physical universe is another example. The set of non existent things is empty, almost by definition. I would say. Bruno > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/e33f31fb-7199-4d84-a1f2-666585a5f585%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/e33f31fb-7199-4d84-a1f2-666585a5f585%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/78C0F1FD-956B-4F54-AABC-A1B608E4BB38%40ulb.ac.be.
