(February 8, 2018 at 12:29 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Steve, try to explain how “nothing” could be actualized as the alternative to something. Go ahead; try it.
(February 8, 2018 at 11:48 am)Grandizer Wrote: "not a single thing exists" means the same thing as "not-something exists". Just as:
"I had nothing for lunch today" means the same thing as "I had not-something for lunch today", which is equivalent in meaning to "I had not a single thing for lunch today",
and
"I saw nobody in the office" means the same thing as "I saw not-somebody in the office", which is equivalent in meaning to "I saw not a single body in the office".
So no problem so far.
Going back to "nothing exists" which means "not a single thing exists" which means "not-something exists":
"exists" means "is something".
So what you're saying is:
"not-something is something".
And so it looks to be a logical contradiction.
Thank you, that was a perfectly clear and perfectly succinct explanation. Better than I’m capable of!
Not so fast. I might have messed up at the end.
I'll tell you why.
The phrase "no apples exist" is not illogical. So my reasoning is flawed there.
Nevertheless, you're still correct.
Nonexistence is what it's really about here.
The other stuff red herrings.
My fault. Time to sleep.