I am not driven by people’ s praise and I am not slowed down by people’ s criticism.
You only live once. But if you live it right, once is enough.
Make poverty history.
Stop aids, keep the promise.
Because there being nothing would make more sense then there being something... Let's be honest here, that we exists is absolutely freaking impossible yet we do.
for you to ask that question, there wud have to be sumthing, nuthingness exists, sumthing exists, and everything else exists including non existance. all unique bubbles in an ocean that by nature is trancendant to anything, everything and nuthing. the reason sumthing exists is because its a concept stemming from abstraction that has a defineable{even if not logical} beginning and characteristics {even if they can only be felt and not understood}. all such concepts exist in their own domain and thus there are an infinite number of them. mostly they are utterly self contained and dont need beginning end/creation destruction unless that is part of what defines them. only in the human mind do they comingle which is an oddity as the human mind is apparently bound in EXISTANCE{the comingling makes u want to imagine nuthingness}. but i think when we are born, a sumthwat blank slate, uncorrupted, innocent, we have the ability to share partly with the trancendant abstraction through which it might be said we came form{in a way, it doesnt mean we were BORN from it as thats another comcept in itself, but we are OF IT, or we WERE "IT". and that ability to comprehend might remain with a few. anyway, its no wonder that we ask the question as any conciounce EXISTING wud. but in reality all things exists in their self contained domains, existance, nonexistance and everything else{n there more than just the 2 metioned}.
It is tempting to think that Nothing would make more sense, that it is the simpler proposition. But that is, after all, our conception of Nothing. The fact is, Something exists, which makes me less certain of the soundness of that proposition.
__________________
Shinier than a speeding bullet.
In my opinion, there can only be existence. The mere fact that something exists, means that it always existed. Something can’t spawn from nothing, or can it? We can only think in existence, that is probably why nonexistence is impossible to comprehend. If we could understand nonexistence, nonexistence would be existent. Something has to exist. In defining nothingness, we are giving it a quality, which is flawed. To even talk of nothingness is making a mistake. I believe that it is impossible for nothingness to be understood, there is “nothing” to understand.
There can only “be” existence.
Before I finish, let me say that I am about 0.000000000000000000000001 percent sure about what I just said.
This is probably the god of philosophical questions.
__________________
Imagination is more important than knowledge... --Albert Einstein--
I agree with nearly everything but the last sentence. You should just say it is a dumb question. That's not to say all metaphysical questions are dumb, but this one certainly is and does not merit any real conversation since there is no basis for either side of the argument.
__________________ "Where ignorance is bliss, 'tis folly to be wise." - Thomas Gray
At there very least there is an observer. Hydrono could be the observer and all of us products of his mind. Or maybe I'm the observer and all of you originate in my mind.
Or, that is a bunch of crap. But, I think metaphysical solipsism is as severe as the nothingness can get.
__________________ Kalash Ibn Al Fewdawiiah Bin Noor
"It is time for every woman who benefited from sexual liberation to loudly declare (in the paraphrased words of Emma Goldman), "If I can't enjoy sex, I won't be part of the revolution." "
I’m not saying that the question makes sense, I’m saying it tries to ask a question that could be considered huge. There is a huge amount of debate between educated people on this exact question, and not all of them come to the same conclusion as us. I am still not absolutely sure of my position.
Well the point is, for as far as we can understand everything has a beginning. That means existing would have a beginning too. But everything that has a beginning has an end, and there was always something before the beginning.
The real question is, what was here before the beginning? And how the hell did that create a beginning and what will be here after the end? And how the hell is that possible?
But this question is pretty much worthless as it's impossible to even understand the concept of nothing and you can never really have an answer as to the how and why. It just is.
Since our understanding is limited, it is reasonable, IMO, to presume that Something need not have had a Beginning. Something always existed (or if you prefer, "Nothing never existed"), and this would be a simpler proposition than Nothing ---> Something.
But this sidesteps the question: Why couldn't Nothing have just remained Nothing? (Personally, I am uncomfortable with the "Nothing is Something" POV because we can not escape our conception of Nothing, which is still what the "Nothing is Something" stance deals with.
Interestingly, mystical traditions say Nothing and Something are just different aspects of the Same Thing, which is ultimately ineffable, not even imaginable...
...though wouldn't that still be "Something?"
__________________
Shinier than a speeding bullet.
Last edited by Mindship on May 17th, 2007 at 11:22 AM
I think they may be right, "nothing" seems to be just like any another type of perception. The meaning we associate to the word "nothing" is our perception, because we give the word that meaning.
Even if we say "nothing" is the opposite of existence, that is still a perception(our perception).
What I am saying is that "nothing" will always be a perception. So technically it will be always something.
Because we exist, before we existed there was no perception of the word nothing, it didn't even exist. Stop looking at the human definition of nothing, it's irrelevant as we don't understand nothing.
Giving nothing a definition means it's something, the nothing that should have been around once can't have a definition because it is nothing.
KMC Community Forums
Why is there something instead of nothing?
May 16th, 2007 07:52 PM
