Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: February 4, 2025, 10:01 am
Atheist Forums › Community › Philosophy v
A hypothetical non-container.

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Thread Modes
A hypothetical non-container.
Edwardo Piet Away
Devil's Supercardo.
Religious Views: Atheistic panexperientialism
Posts: 43162
Threads: 720
Joined: September 21, 2008
Reputation: 132
#11
RE: A hypothetical non-container.
March 17, 2010 at 4:42 am
It isn't empty because even empty space is absolutely teeming with quantum activity apparently Big Grin

Lol

I thought 0 didn't really cant as a number and nothing didn't really count as something? So if it was truly empty then it has to be just that, truly empty - it cannot be 'full'. '0 max' just means 'nothing' doesn't it? I'm mildly confused (mildly for me that is ).

EvF
Find
Reply
Violet Offline
Buffalo and Bee Lover
*****
Religious Views: There are beeautiful cloud buffalo in the sky.
Posts: 15755
Threads: 194
Joined: May 15, 2009
Reputation: 145
#12
RE: A hypothetical non-container.
March 17, 2010 at 4:44 am (This post was last modified: March 17, 2010 at 4:45 am by Violet.)
(March 17, 2010 at 4:42 am)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: It isn't empty because even empty space is absolutely teeming with quantum activity apparently Big Grin

Lol
Evidence? :S

Quote:I thought 0 didn't really cant as a number and nothing didn't really count as something? So if it was truly empty then it has to be just that, truly empty - it cannot be 'full'. '0 max' just means 'nothing' doesn't it? I'm mildly confused (mildly for me that is ).

EvF

Emptiness is the state at which there is nothing. Hence to be truly empty of all things... a thing must be filled with no things. Therefore it is full of nothing... and because of that empty Smile
Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
Find
Reply
Edwardo Piet Away
Devil's Supercardo.
Religious Views: Atheistic panexperientialism
Posts: 43162
Threads: 720
Joined: September 21, 2008
Reputation: 132
#13
RE: A hypothetical non-container.
March 17, 2010 at 4:54 am
(March 17, 2010 at 4:44 am)Saerules Wrote: Evidence? :S

I either read it somewhere I can't remember where or heard it on some documentary about Quantum Mechanics.

I guess the point is that what was once thought of as 'empty space' isn't truly empty because smaller and smaller particles keep being found, I dunno.

EvF
Find
Reply
Xyster Offline
Junior Member
**
Religious Views: Anti-passwordian
Posts: 261
Threads: 14
Joined: August 10, 2009
Reputation: 2
#14
RE: A hypothetical non-container.
March 17, 2010 at 5:39 am
SHIT... I cant get anything in this ..... im taking it back to the store... last time I buy tupperware knock offs Smile
Did I make a good point? thumbs up Smile I cant help it I'm a Kudos whore. P.S. Jesus is a MYTH.
Find
Reply
Ryft Offline
Logic Enforcement Officer
***
Religious Views: Christian
Posts: 795
Threads: 27
Joined: July 1, 2009
Reputation: 27
#15
RE: A hypothetical non-container.
March 17, 2010 at 5:50 am
(March 16, 2010 at 9:36 pm)Tiberius Wrote: If we have a container that can hold a maximum of 0 items, is it full or empty?

If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done?

(March 17, 2010 at 4:09 am)Tiberius Wrote: Of course, it all depends on how you defined "empty" and "full".

No, it all depends on how you define "container." If it can hold a maximum of 0 items, it's not a container.

FTW.
Man is a rational animal who always loses his temper when
called upon to act in accordance with the dictates of reason.
(Oscar Wilde)
Find
Reply
Violet Offline
Buffalo and Bee Lover
*****
Religious Views: There are beeautiful cloud buffalo in the sky.
Posts: 15755
Threads: 194
Joined: May 15, 2009
Reputation: 145
#16
RE: A hypothetical non-container.
March 17, 2010 at 6:01 am
Arcanus Wrote:No, it all depends on how you define "container." If it can hold a maximum of 0 items, it's not a container.
Sure it is! It contains nothing... so it's a container of nothing! Joke

Quote:If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done?

Dodgy ... Why didn't i think of that... Dodgy

I think the question is set up in a way that makes it unanswerable. Would this be an example of a loaded question, Arcanus? If not: what particular fallacy would the above quote be invoking?
Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
Find
Reply
tackattack Offline
Non-Militant Hippie Lover
*****
Religious Views: Non-denominational Christian
Posts: 4446
Threads: 87
Joined: December 2, 2009
Reputation: 47
#17
RE: A hypothetical non-container.
March 17, 2010 at 7:09 am
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.
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post

always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
Find
Reply
Violet Offline
Buffalo and Bee Lover
*****
Religious Views: There are beeautiful cloud buffalo in the sky.
Posts: 15755
Threads: 194
Joined: May 15, 2009
Reputation: 145
#18
RE: A hypothetical non-container.
March 17, 2010 at 7:11 am (This post was last modified: March 17, 2010 at 7:12 am by Violet.)
(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?
Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
Find
Reply
tackattack Offline
Non-Militant Hippie Lover
*****
Religious Views: Non-denominational Christian
Posts: 4446
Threads: 87
Joined: December 2, 2009
Reputation: 47
#19
RE: A hypothetical non-container.
March 17, 2010 at 7:19 am
because of the container's definition it has to be able to contain some thing. It keeps something within limits. If you have no limit then it does not contain, therefore not a container. However stating it was a container created the paradox, so to solve it you assume the definition was wrong by going over the details and applying occam's razor. If 1 word was wrong container is the most likely.
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post

always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
Find
Reply
fr0d0 Offline
H0ary H0bbit
Religious Views: “Never to suffer would never to have been blessed.” - Edgar Allan Poe
Posts: 14259
Threads: 48
Joined: March 1, 2009
Reputation: 80
#20
RE: A hypothetical non-container.
March 17, 2010 at 7:32 am
I'm imagining an empty coffee tin run over by a truck.

& I often succeed at failing Big Grin
Find
Reply


Atheist Forums › Community › Philosophy v
A hypothetical non-container.

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Does the fact that many non-human animals have pituitary disprove Cartesian Dualism? FlatAssembler 36 3617 June 23, 2023 at 9:36 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Metaethics Part 1: Cognitivism/Non-cognitivism Disagreeable 24 2546 February 11, 2022 at 6:46 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  In Defense of a Non-Natural Moral Order Acrobat 84 10080 August 30, 2019 at 3:02 pm
Last Post: LastPoet
  The Philosophy of Mind: Zombies, "radical emergence" and evidence of non-experiential Edwardo Piet 82 15683 April 29, 2018 at 1:57 am
Last Post: bennyboy
  Non-existing objects KerimF 81 25314 June 28, 2017 at 2:34 am
Last Post: KerimF
  What philosophical evidence is there against believing in non-physical entities? joseph_ 150 16782 September 3, 2016 at 11:26 am
Last Post: downbeatplumb
  The difference between a sceptic and a non-sceptic robvalue 12 2346 May 20, 2016 at 2:55 pm
Last Post: robvalue
  God as a non-empirical being noctalla 39 6879 April 19, 2015 at 4:46 am
Last Post: robvalue
  On non-belief and the existence of God FallentoReason 72 16135 August 21, 2014 at 7:05 pm
Last Post: bennyboy
  Non-literal atheism? stonedape 42 9063 August 20, 2014 at 5:07 pm
Last Post: stonedape



Users browsing this thread: 7 Guest(s)