[Micah] > We have evidence of A - the universe exists. > We have absolutely no evidence of B - [nothingness] exists.
[Ham] > From a conceptual viewpoint, you must first determine what it is that > "exists". What is this "determining what it is that 'exists'" which must preceed evidence of what exists? [Ham] > are we willing to say that experience exists? Yes, experience exists whenever it occurs. [Ham] [Nothingness existing] is self-contradictory by definition. Suppose the universe consists of an equal number of + & - particles. One by one they collide & annilate each other. Can our language guarantee that the last + particle cannot collide with that last - particle? [dmb] > why couldn't the universe come into existence > from something rather than nothing? [Ham] > It had to, of course. Or NOT. [dmb] > Why couldn't the universe come into existence from something other > than the universe? [Ham] > it happens to be the creation hypothesis I constructed for Essence. But what evidence could you have for this "something other than the universe"? Craig Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
