The Modal Ontological Argument - Without Modal Logic

[Angrboda]

We don't know enough about the something to speak knowledgably about it's absence. You say you know the bounds of nothing. I say you do not.

we can know the bounds of something if it is a concept we have defined and there are logical absurdities tied to that definition. as i said, nothing is defined as the absence of anything. as such, i can easily say non-properties can't be properties. non-things can't be things. therefore to speak of nothing as though it is a thing capable of action is logically absurd.

You know that for a fact, do you. Where's your Nobel prize?

You don't know shit.