(March 17, 2010 at 7:11 am)Saerules Wrote:(March 17, 2010 at 7:09 am)tackattack Wrote: no Sae because the definition of a container is something that contains or keeps within limits. While your limit here is nothing or 0 therefore the definition isn't applicable.
Why couldn't a container contain nothing... in seriousness? A container might contain all of a thing, a little of a thing, a few things, something or another, or no things at all. If the limit here is that the container can only contain nothing... then why couldn't it contain nothing?
To say that it can hold nothing is to say that it cannot hold anything. If it cannot contain anything then it isn't a container. Nothing isn't a thing; we just use the word in a funny way.
