The Value of nothing is everything

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by Quantum Quack, Jun 4, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    If everything is in some kind of relationship with everything only then can nothing- ness not exist.

    That nothing ness is a default result of everything being in a relationship with everything.

    For example : A fly has a relationship with a star on the other side of the universe.

    Every existant "thing" could be stated as being in a relationship with every existant thing. It is only when this is so, nothing- ness no-exists by default.

    Thus the value of nothing is everything.

    Care to discuss?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. nicholas1M7 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,417

    Is value the right word? Or definition?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. TruthSeeker Fancy Virtual Reality Monkey Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,162
    Maybe nothing-ness by definition is something which has no relationship with anything else?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    How can nothingness has any relationship with something?

    How does that follow?

    Yes. At least indirectly.

    How does that follow? What do you mean by "no-exists"?

    What does value has anything to do with this discussion?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Winner of Discontent i am a banana Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    31
    how can everything have a relationship with everything else? so there is a force in the universe that ties everything together in some form of harmony to counter nothingness? sounds suspiciously like the seven degrees of kevin bacon game.

    the way i am reading this is that nothingness is the default of everything being in a relationship with everything else yet only once everything is in a relationship with everything else will nothingness no longer be the default. seems contradictory.

    and yes, a definition of nothingness or how you interpret it is somewhat integral to understand this post. to me, nothingness is merely a feeling...not a force. i don't believe i am tied to anything in the universe. when i die, it will go on without me unaware that i was ever here.

    not sure i've understood what you mean...i have embraced my nothingness for too long probably. tho i will say, atm the value of nothing is everything to me.
     
  8. TruthSeeker Fancy Virtual Reality Monkey Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,162
    At least indirectly, yes (besides the nothingness par- that's debatable).
     
  9. nicholas1M7 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,417

    TruthSeeker,

    what he is saying is that IF everything is related to each and every thing else, then and only then can nothing not exist (i.e. there would be no such thing as nothing, it would be meaningless to speak of such). However, if not each and every thing in existence were related, i.e. if two things in the universe could be said to be truly unrelated, then nothingness is a possibility somewhere, anywhere in the universe. Hence, this everything relationship is what gives meaning to the word nothing.
     
  10. RoyLennigan Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,011
    the human concept of nothingness is decieving. what we percieve as nothing is really uniformity of a whole. we see complete blackness when really there is a minute difference that our senses are too limited to pick up on. we see a white paper when it is really just a repeating pattern of the same kinds of molecules. therefore i think nothing is just a misconcieved perception of everything as a whole.

    everything is related somehow and every tiny event affects every other tiny event in some way. so it could be said that there can be no distinction between anything and that we are all part of one big thing--the universe.
     
  11. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    Nicholas1M7 I think has understood the logic I am proposing with this thread.
    It is a little difficult to get the 'ole head around I guess.
    I'll post more later....gotta run...
     
  12. TruthSeeker Fancy Virtual Reality Monkey Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,162
    I see what is being said...
    I'm not sure if it follows, however...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  13. Tnerb Banned Banned

    Messages:
    7,917
    yeah, hard to get the ol head around alright. i guess you just gotta pay attention!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    beat your flippin foot up aganist a tree karatie chop!
    verrrryyyy interesting QQ
     
  14. TruthSeeker Fancy Virtual Reality Monkey Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,162
    How about some nicely laid out premises that follow into a conclusion?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  15. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    I feel it would be prudent to clarify, stating with out any reservation that nothing-ness can not exist.

    For if it exists it can no longer be classified as nothingness [ in absolutum ]

    To extend it to the threads proposition:

    For nothing- ness to not exist [ no-exist ~ a new word...hmmmm] everything else must exist.

    And to do so everything must be in an existant relationship in that if one thing exists then another thing does also. That is to say that they share a relationship of existing [ simplified approach]

    If one assumes that every thing come to be at some starting point then everything in existance has it's origins at that point. So therefore it could be said that a relationship must exist even if just a point of creation.

    For example the matter that comprises my body is the same age and comes from the same soriginal source as yours or any body elses. There fore we share a relationship of origin.

    So it could be stated clearly I feel that all exisistant "things" have a relationship with all existant "things"

    It is only because of this relationship that nothing-ness can not exist.

    if any "thing" has no relationship then nothingness could be said co-exist with somethingness.

    And if nothingness exists then it can no longer be considered as nothingness in absolutum, because it now enjoys a relationship of co-existance.

    So...nothingness can only not exist if everything has a relationship with everything.

    The question I feel is how to prove that nothing-ness does not exist.

    I tend to think that is we can prove that every "thing" is in a relationship with every "thing"* then we have proved nothing-ness's non-existance by default.
    [* nothingness is not a "thing"]


    this is a bit harder to explain........hmmmm.....

    a long the lines of "zero = infinity"....but I'll get back to this later..if I can.......

    "sorry guys, I posted the thread with out having the time resources to put into the follow up... my mistake"
     
  16. RoyLennigan Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,011
    i say i would have to agree with you. i have come to the exact same conclusion independantly--that if everything exists in a relation to each other, then nothingness cannot exist. nothing includes a lack of relation, by definition, and so it cannot exist in a universe where all things affect each other.

    but i would not say that the value of nothing is everthing. i think the misconcieved idea of nothing by humans has the value of everything. we see a blank wall and call it nothing, when in reality it is something that is uniform. but the value of an actual nothing would be undefined, like dividing by 0. the value of everything would be infinite.
     
  17. TruthSeeker Fancy Virtual Reality Monkey Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,162
  18. c7ityi_ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,924
    there are always some atoms to 'perceive' the trees.
     
  19. RoyLennigan Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,011
    exactly
     
  20. TruthSeeker Fancy Virtual Reality Monkey Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,162
    So atoms have consciousness?
     
  21. c7ityi_ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,924
    teehee... to us it seems like matter is dead because we're so much more alive/conscious. but you know that animals are alive, and even plants, and tiny microbes. why would there be a line between dead and alive somewhere? there is no line, but it's like with light... there are infinite colors... infinite different states of consciousness.

    atoms don't have the ability to see things cuz they don't have eyes.. ;P but they still can "feel/experience" something, which is the reason why they are in motion. a magnet attracts metals and other magnets. it's a very primitive kind of love.

    i mean... the experiencer and the experienced are not separated. if there is an experiencer, there is something to experience. if there is something to experience, there is an experiencer.

    motion is not possible without consciousness.

    the reason atoms start building human bodies and things is because there are tiny humans and animals also living in those [to us] microscopic worlds. they strive for the same things as we do. unification. surviving.

    the universe is a giant living organism. imagine that this organism would be hurt, and it would damage our earth a little. the life on earth... humans... animals... plants... we would heal it.

    that's the reason our wounds heal if we are hurt.

    everything is alive. everything is you, in another form. one self, infinite bodies.
     
  22. RoyLennigan Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,011
    no, but atoms are affected by sound.
     
  23. TruthSeeker Fancy Virtual Reality Monkey Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,162
    We are talking about consciousness, here...
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page