View Poll Results: Is nothing actually something?

Voters
29. You may not vote on this poll
  • Alpha NT and No. - Absolute nothing is nothing.

    4 13.79%
  • Alpha SF and No. - Absolute nothing is nothing.

    0 0%
  • Alpha NT and Yes. - Absolute nothing is something.

    2 6.90%
  • Alpha SF and Yes. - Absolute nothing is something.

    1 3.45%
  • Beta NF and No. - Absolute nothing is nothing.

    1 3.45%
  • Beta ST and No. - Absolute nothing is nothing.

    0 0%
  • Beta NF and Yes. - Absolute nothing is something.

    5 17.24%
  • Beta ST and Yes. - Absolute nothing is something.

    0 0%
  • Gamma NT and No. - Absolute nothing is nothing.

    3 10.34%
  • Gamma SF and No. - Absolute nothing is nothing.

    0 0%
  • Gamma NT and Yes. - Absolute nothing is something.

    5 17.24%
  • Gamma SF and Yes. - Absolute nothing is something.

    0 0%
  • Delta NF and No. - Absolute nothing is nothing.

    4 13.79%
  • Delta ST and No. - Absolute nothing is nothing.

    0 0%
  • Delta NF and Yes. - Absolute nothing is something.

    4 13.79%
  • Delta ST and Yes. - Absolute nothing is something.

    0 0%
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 41 to 80 of 103

Thread: Is nothing actually something?

  1. #41
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,685
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HaveLucidDreamz View Post
    From what I remember of quantum mechanics you have effects like quantum entanglement. The wave function of a particular particle is dependent on the particles in which it interacts. Normally in classical particle physics this is a foreign concept. A particle that is separate from another shouldn't effect the state of that particle as they are two distinct entities. If a particle somewhere decides to change from say a state which we shall arbitrarily call "red" to a state which we arbitrarily call "blue" then this shouldn't effect another distinct particle -- as it is separate, a particle changing to the "blue" state won't make another change "red". However in quantum mechanics it does, and a major question in physics is exactly what the mechanicism of this entanglement is.
    Karma
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  2. #42
    Korpsy Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    4,231
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labocat View Post
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hg7qdowoemo
    Good choice. Zizek is another of my favorite comedians.

    Quote Originally Posted by HaveLucidDreamz View Post
    From what I remember of quantum mechanics you have effects like quantum entanglement. The wave function of a particular particle is dependent on the particles in which it interacts. Normally in classical particle physics this is a foreign concept. A particle that is separate from another shouldn't effect the state of that particle as they are two distinct entities. If a particle somewhere decides to change from say a state which we shall arbitrarily call "red" to a state which we arbitrarily call "blue" then this shouldn't effect another distinct particle -- as it is separate, a particle changing to the "blue" state won't make another change "red". However in quantum mechanics it does, and a major question in physics is exactly what the mechanicism of this entanglement is.

    I'll add more on this later.
    Now explain this in a universe devoid of particles, space, waves, energy, puppies, suppertime, trekkie conventions, colors, or anything at all, let alone two anythings to be distinct or separate from one another.

  3. #43
    Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    4,922
    Mentioned
    220 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Galen View Post
    This doesn't implicate that existence and non-existence are the same thing, nor does it mean that there was once a time where something never existed at all. We could probably go into quantum physics and string theory energy bullshit that nobody on here actually understands to pose the argument that something was never nothing in the first place, and that its presence was/is simply transmuted into another form which we are unable to personally comprehend.
    Yeah, I just prefer to look at it as existence and non-existence being a team that together make the other possible. So basically my point is that nothing and something are just two different kinds of something.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ekpyrosos View Post
    I cannot deny that there might be more to existence than the material, and so I cannot definitively equate Being with the supposed resultant appearance of the Big Bang's space-time, energy, and matter. Nor, I think, must being possess extension and duration to exist (though it's kind of brain-bender to imagine how, because even if those are illusionary byproducts created by the nature of our limited understanding of the world, they're still how we understand the world). Still, if we assume the truth of what you're saying then can't the nothingness prior to the appearance of physical reality be said to contain the possibility of eventual somethingness? If yes, as your answer suggests, then that inherent quality of latent somethingness enhances the thingness of nothing, at least in this case. We can go a step further and say that being can exist in the absence of its manifestations.
    I agree, it is possible that there was something before the big bang and not just nothing. If that's the case then all the big bang did was mix something and nothing into the big chaotic mess that is known as the universe or multiverse if there are a substantial amount of universes. So prior to the big bang, nothing and something were probably more distinct and divided. Also, nothing is something like that Alan Watts video posted by leckysupport suggests because the two need eachother to exist.
    “We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-9w1-4w5

  4. #44
    Angel of Lightning Brilliand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Utah
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    4,235
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ekpyrosos View Post
    OK, but it sounds like you're describing an absence of matter within a prescribed space, inside a universe like ours where space, matter, time, energy, etc. seem to exist. In other words, a nothing that only exists as a non-thing in relation to one or more extant or potential things, and a nothing that still contains something, i.e. spatial extensionality and an energy state. Rather like what Watts spoke of in the video that lecky posted above, a relative nothing instead of the absolute kind. But our OP's featured hypothetical is the latter sort, a universe of absolutely nothing but nothing, that excludes space and energy and anything else. So if all that there is Isn't, and there's no capacity for anything to be at all, is that total nonexistence actually extant in its own right?
    It could certainly never be detected, and that's as far as the argument from science can go. My attitude is that anything that provably has no hope of being demonstrated to be real must therefore be considered imaginary.



    LII-Ne

    "Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
    - Blair Houghton

    Johari

  5. #45
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,685
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brilliand View Post
    It could certainly never be detected, and that's as far as the argument from science can go. My attitude is that anything that provably has no hope of being demonstrated to be real must therefore be considered imaginary.
    Who are any of us to say it has no hope of being demonstrated? Neanderthals never even knew the moon existed as anything more than a big globe in the sky; for one of them to contemplate being launched at it in a firey missile and landing delicately on its surface in a precision engineered metal robot would probably cause his or her brain to explode with the incomprehensibility of the experience. Never underestimate the shortcomings of your own knowledge and experience.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  6. #46
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Nothing is a shade of beta Ti.

  7. #47
    Angel of Lightning Brilliand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Utah
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    4,235
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly View Post
    Who are any of us to say it has no hope of being demonstrated? Neanderthals never even knew the moon existed as anything more than a big globe in the sky; for one of them to contemplate being launched at it in a firey missile and landing delicately on its surface in a precision engineered metal robot would probably cause his or her brain to explode with the incomprehensibility of the experience. Never underestimate the shortcomings of your own knowledge and experience.
    Wait... we're talking about genuine nothing here. For it to be detected would immediately prove that it wasn't really nothing after all.



    LII-Ne

    "Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
    - Blair Houghton

    Johari

  8. #48
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,915
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This is really a question about the mind body problem, and whether there is a god. From our minds perspective, it is impossible to comprehend nothing. There is duality in everything we see. Life is defined by death, positive negative, nothing by something. That is the consequence of the subject / object divide. But if you take a perspective outside of everything; from the eyes of God, the monistic view allows for self defined singularities; life is defined by life, nothing is nothing. It is at this level things are accepted by faith, and logic comes after. I side with that because it provides a basis for reality existing in the first place, and it makes structural sense that duality is secondary to singularity.
    Also, things make sense as they match reality, but reality itself doesn't make sense; it just is. Balance is something the mind applies to reality. There are potential realities so far beyond the one we exist in.
    Last edited by rat1; 03-04-2012 at 04:06 PM.

  9. #49
    Creepy-pokeball

    Default

    When yo momma does nothing all of your life, that is something.

  10. #50
    redbaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    9,315
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I didn't read everyone's response to this thread by I don't believe in nothing. There is no such thing as nothing. Maybe something that seems like nothing but it's not actually nothing. It's always something.

  11. #51
    ■■■■■■ Radio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    2,571
    Mentioned
    154 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Ne/Si ≈ nothingness is a mental construct, and thus it can exist insofar as we assume it exists as a concept.

    Se/Ni ≈ nothingness is non-being, and thus impossible to conceive or understand as we only deal with the realm of being.

  12. #52
    Korpsy Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    4,231
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedratremix View Post
    This is really a question about the mind body problem
    Rat hits the nail on the head. As I stated in the the OP, my experience of corporeal Being prejudices my outlook and complicates my ability to conceptualize Non-Being. It's because our brains are part of our bodies and because we receive external information and process/act upon it in an embodied fashion that this problem exists at all. In fact when I make the attempt to visualize a reality of non-being (which I first undertook at age 5), or think of how our universe "actually is" absent our mental constructions of Space and Time, it gives rise to a strange pseudo-sensation of bodily warping and distortion to fit the contours of reality's "true" topology instead of the way we perceive it.

    Quote Originally Posted by redbaron View Post
    I didn't read everyone's response to this thread by I don't believe in nothing. There is no such thing as nothing. Maybe something that seems like nothing but it's not actually nothing. It's always something.
    But can you now imagine something you don't believe to be real? I assume you can with griffons and dragons. If not an un-universe of nothing, why not? And if you can, is that nothing something?

    Quote Originally Posted by Radio View Post
    Ne/Si ≈ nothingness is a mental construct, and thus it can exist insofar as we assume it exists as a concept.

    Se/Ni ≈ nothingness is non-being, and thus impossible to conceive or understand as we only deal with the realm of being.
    Eh, I could argue either of these as being valid. We're examining an imaginary problem to begin with. Within our own universe such total nothingness seems impossible, because of the QM arguments pointed out earlier ("empty" space will always contain the possiblity of something) and by the sheer fact that space and time are still apparent properties of any vacuum we can create in our world, no matter how "pure" (because in our world we can only create a nothing relative to somethings, not an absolute nothing; it also requires an effort to maintain this relative nothingness, and the moment the mechanisms creating it fail, something rushes in to occupy that empty space). So from a more or less realistic (or Being-biased) standpoint it'd be necessary to merge or juggle the two positions you've outlined. Viewing the Ne/Si position, it also seems necessary for there to be someone in order to declare whether "constructs can be assumed to exist conceptually", which is also implicit in the idea of playing a godlike observer to a totality of nothingness so potential its properties, including thingness, can be ascertained. Otherwise we're stuck waiting for Nothingness to account for itself.


  13. #53
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,742
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Nothing and zero are a few of my favorite things.
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  14. #54
    Park's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beyond the blue horizon
    TIM
    SLI-Si 8w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    13,421
    Mentioned
    186 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labocat View Post
    WTF is wrong with him? Shaking like crazy and all...
    “Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly
    You've done yourself a huge favor developmentally by mustering the balls to do something really fucking scary... in about the most vulnerable situation possible.

  15. #55
    Trevor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,840
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Parkster View Post
    WTF is wrong with him? Shaking like crazy and all...
    saying that love is evil + shaking like crazy and all..

    Is this not without devil?

  16. #56
    I've been waiting for you Satan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Behind you
    TIM
    sle sp/sx 845
    Posts
    4,925
    Mentioned
    146 Post(s)
    Tagged
    16 Thread(s)

    Default

    get a life

  17. #57

    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    0
    Mentioned
    Post(s)
    Tagged
    Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't see how it could be possible to know this without having a proper ontological definition of a "thing". It seems to me that the conception that "nothing" is actually some thing is true only through semantics games. One thing I have noticed in myself recently is how biased I am, and I suppose it is generally true that one is inclined to believe that he believes is true... but the limitations of language make these things much more difficult, for though language is but a tool created by man, it remains something that cannot fulfill its purpose very well. I suspect that the primary source of intersubjective relativity is through language, even though those who have deluded themselves into believing reality is simple and saying man has the capacity to know everything would probably tell you differently. I know that reality as it is commonly understood is shaped within each man by his self, but I am once again coming to vague ideas which I have no words for, ideas which were there for a moment and then gone and have since evaded me for years.

    I think that language is insufficient to describe reality in any real sense.
    Last edited by nil; 03-05-2012 at 08:13 PM.

  18. #58
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    17,948
    Mentioned
    162 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default


  19. #59
    Korpsy Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    4,231
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nil View Post
    I think that language is insufficient to describe reality in any real sense.
    Fuck it like you mean it.

  20. #60
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,915
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    well language in itself is meaningless without a connection with another person.

  21. #61
    "Cool Mafia Godfather" ~SLE Leader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    TIM
    ESTp 8
    Posts
    918
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Nothing is always something. Absolute "nothingness" however, is incomprehensible. Therefore it does not exist, at least not to us.
    Last edited by Leader; 03-06-2012 at 12:53 AM.

  22. #62
    "Cool Mafia Godfather" ~SLE Leader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    TIM
    ESTp 8
    Posts
    918
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labocat View Post
    Cocaine is a helluva drug.

  23. #63
    squark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,814
    Mentioned
    286 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If it has boundaries, then it's something. It's delineated, defined, an empty container if nothing else. To have no boundaries, would mean that it encompasses everything, which is clearly impossible.

  24. #64
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    /
    Posts
    7,038
    Mentioned
    175 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    nothing and something are both concepts as is everything. nothing in what context?

  25. #65
    Shazaam's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Lamp
    TIM
    AB-IEI-Ni
    Posts
    13,811
    Mentioned
    596 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Nothing is Everything.

    A single person wishes and has the *desire* that they can acquire every perspective, but the best they can do is strengthen their own. Nothing is narcisissm - but everything is narcissistic.

    We want everything (especially women - sorry couldn't resist the jibe there) but then when we do that we ironically end up with NOTHING.

    "People who want the whole world end up being their own worst enemies" - Xena, Warrior Princess.

    So brave, so wise.

  26. #66
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,685
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fireyed View Post
    Read Eckhart Tolle's books The Power Of Now, and A New Earth. His books are pretty much about this concept.
    Yeah but he refers to it in a more...internal and self-relating spiritual context, whereas I think k0rpsy is speaking in a more ontological sense. There's no denying the two are linked but in this case there is an obvious distinction.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  27. #67
    Feel God's Thunder Azure Flame's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    West Jesus
    TIM
    Neon Ninja Phoenix
    Posts
    1,538
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If you're an Ne user, the answer to this question is yes.

    <dog barking in the distance>

  28. #68
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,685
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The thing is, "nothingness" is only an idea, because we exist in a self-contained "universe" that has things that inherently negate the idea of "total nothingness" in our minds; anything that would be "nothing" has an inherent relational quality to what we mentally refer to as things, putting it on the same sort of sliding scale and therefore implicitly sharing some qualities, which is logically absurd because "nothing" should have no qualities; it doesn't have anything else, does it? So it is kind of logically incomprehensible, just because of the way we are forced to frame it. But in the strictly theoretical sense, no, I don't think "nothing" is a "something" in any sense beyond what we have to make it into in order to put lines around it and make it "something" to talk about.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  29. #69
    Korpsy Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    4,231
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly View Post
    Yeah but he refers to it in a more...internal and self-relating spiritual context, whereas I think k0rpsy is speaking in a more ontological sense. There's no denying the two are linked but in this case there is an obvious distinction.
    Ontological conditions are directly responsible for framing the nature of the experiential and speculative, so it is useful to understand them in both the personal and the cosmic sense. And if the means can be found to achieve both at once then all the better. I am not familiar with Tolle but from reading his wiki-p list of influences it sounds like he speaks my language.

  30. #70
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,742
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The only real nothing is something you couldn't even talk about or imagine.

    Damnit I'm saying it's still something tho
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  31. #71
    Local Hero Saberstorm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Isle of Man
    TIM
    Robespierre
    Posts
    2,125
    Mentioned
    68 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Mozart is dead.

    Mozart never knew this moment in time would come.

    Mozart never knew that you were playing his music.

    Every single person who ever played his music will die.

    Every single copy of his music will be destroyed by time.

    Mozart is dead.

    Mozart is dead.

    Mozart is dead.

     
    God is most glorified when we are most satisfied in Him.
    - John Piper


    Socionics -
    the16types.info

  32. #72
    Park's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beyond the blue horizon
    TIM
    SLI-Si 8w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    13,421
    Mentioned
    186 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Before the big bang there was nothing.
    “Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly
    You've done yourself a huge favor developmentally by mustering the balls to do something really fucking scary... in about the most vulnerable situation possible.

  33. #73
    Korpsy Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    4,231
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Blah blah monist idealism blah blah blah Indian philosophy blah blah nirguṇa Brahman or "the impersonal Absolute Truth without any material qualities".

    Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

  34. #74
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,937
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    being and non-being are united in becoming. - W.F. Hegel

    in as far as the void possess some latent potential for turning into "something" it can be said to have a rudimentary form of something-ness to it.

  35. #75
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    17,948
    Mentioned
    162 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by k0rpsy View Post
    Ontological conditions are directly responsible for framing the nature of the experiential and speculative, so it is useful to understand them in both the personal and the cosmic sense. And if the means can be found to achieve both at once then all the better. I am not familiar with Tolle but from reading his wiki-p list of influences it sounds like he speaks my language.
    He sure does, New Age mystical guru preaching anti-reason and at the same time "trying" to remain objective. Korpsey, meet your enlightened Tolle. Tolle meet enlightened Korpsey.

    Best part is you reject Christianity but accept Buddhism and I'm sure it's okay in your book seeing a guy "who speaks your language" to utilise it, preach it and live by it.

    Last edited by Absurd; 01-21-2013 at 10:38 AM.

  36. #76
    ■■■■■■ Radio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    2,571
    Mentioned
    154 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Radio View Post
    Ne/Si ≈ nothingness is a mental construct, and thus it can exist insofar as we assume it exists as a concept.

    Se/Ni ≈ nothingness is non-being, and thus impossible to conceive or understand as we only deal with the realm of being.
    wtf is this shit

  37. #77
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    17,948
    Mentioned
    162 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Radio View Post
    wtf is this shit
    You're Tolle as well.

  38. #78
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    17,948
    Mentioned
    162 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Anyway, I'm not 100% sure about Tolle nor have read very substantial stuff on him to check myself, only thing I know do far is what I have bumped in myself when it comes to bits he wrote, not thinking about he is writing them at all. "Clever" fellow...

    One thing is for sure, things on here are upside down.

    So yes, there is nothing in the world except matter in motion and this motion must assume certain forms - each of you wouldn't be able to walk if it wasn't so - which brings one to Tolle's thoughts ideas are not real (no shit). More interesting is, he goes on how the world is an illusion. The material world, I take it.

    1.Thoughts are not real,

    2. World is an illusion, not real as well.

    3. That would mean he doesn't exist in this plane.

  39. #79
    InvisibleJim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Si vis pacem
    TIM
    para bellum
    Posts
    4,809
    Mentioned
    206 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Nothing is the absence of something.

  40. #80
    Mermaid with Stellar views SyrupDeGem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    All about dat heart, no trouble.
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    1,467
    Mentioned
    88 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    No thing, is still a thing

    Now this is a story all about how, my type got changed, turned upside down. Just wait for a minute and watch chatbox right there, & I'll tell how Gem became the moderator with blue hair.

    In typology central friended and praised, on the picture thread was where she spent most her days. Chilling out, selfies, relaxing all cool, And all typing some people and getting them schooled.

    When a couple of girls who were up to no good, Started annoying her & her friends in the forumhood, She got in one little flame war & got pissed off & said 'I'm moving in with that exboyfriend in the forum with the socionics toffs.

    So Gem pulls up to the forum for a year without being a hater, And yells to typocentral 'Yo creeps! Smell Ya later', Became a mod in her kingdom she was finally there, To sit on her throne as the mod with blue hair.

    InvisibruJim

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •