The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Dontaskme »

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Blah, blah. blah.

I know you are but what am I ?
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

Dontaskme wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Blah, blah. blah.

I know you are but what am I ?
You are verbal diarrhea. Words without meaning; reflections without sense; problems without cause.
Why not stop and try to unpack some of your rubbish? Don't just dump it all on here; unpick it and see if it has any substance to it.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Dontaskme »

Hobbes' Choice wrote: You are verbal diarrhea. Words without meaning; reflections without sense; problems without cause.
This is known as knowing yourself :lol:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:Why not stop and try to unpack some of your rubbish? Don't just dump it all on here;
But there is only HERE.. where else does anything happen? is there another HERE? are there two dumping grounds ? have you ever seen two grounds...that's like saying there are two sky's :lol: ..THERE IS ONLY INFINITE SPACE...where EVERYTHING HAPPENS...the contents OF SPACE being nothing other than the space it occupies.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:unpick it and see if it has any substance to it.
Have you ever seen any substance in a pile of alphabetti spagetti? separate from the alphabetti spagetti? :lol: any description of the substance of alpha spagetti could only be about the alpha spagetti :shock:

WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO PROVE? AND WHO ARE YOU TRYING TO CONVINCE? ...your just sitting HERE at the edge of not knowing....knowledge is not going to save you...WHO THE HECK DO YOU THINK YOU ARE?

Hobbes it's time to get real and stop clinging to your imaginary friend.......people are breaking free of the shackles that once held them prisoner to an imaginary friend..aka ego...you need to catch up before you get left all alone... :mrgreen:
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

Dontaskme wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote: You are verbal diarrhea. Words without meaning; reflections without sense; problems without cause.
This is known as knowing yourself :lol:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:Why not stop and try to unpack some of your rubbish? Don't just dump it all on here;
But there is only HERE.. where else does anything happen? is there another HERE? are there two dumping grounds ? have you ever seen two grounds...that's like saying there are two sky's :lol: ..THERE IS ONLY INFINITE SPACE...where EVERYTHING HAPPENS...the contents OF SPACE being nothing other than the space it occupies.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:unpick it and see if it has any substance to it.
Have you ever seen any substance in a pile of alphabetti spagetti? separate from the alphabetti spagetti? :lol: any description of the substance of alpha spagetti could only be about the alpha spagetti :shock:

WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO PROVE? AND WHO ARE YOU TRYING TO CONVINCE? ...your just sitting HERE at the edge of not knowing....knowledge is not going to save you...WHO THE HECK DO YOU THINK YOU ARE?

Hobbes it's time to get real and stop clinging to your imaginary friend.......people are breaking free of the shackles that once held them prisoner to an imaginary friend..aka ego...you need to catch up before you get left all alone... :mrgreen:
Please refer to the answer I gave above.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Dontaskme »

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Please refer to the answer I gave above.
The body doesn't need the hitchhiker, i.e. the social identity, to do what it must do. The body is never confused. The heartbeat doesn't have a question about what people say.

I'm a unique mutation of no thing and so is every other unique never to be repeated mutation of no thing... we can only smell our own shit.
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

Dontaskme wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Please refer to the answer I gave above.
The body doesn't need the hitchhiker, i.e. the social identity, to do what it must do. The body is never confused. The heartbeat doesn't have a question about what people say.

I'm a unique mutation of no thing and so is every other unique never to be repeated mutation of no thing... we can only smell our own shit.
Keep taking the medication.
User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5688
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by SpheresOfBalance »

Greta wrote:
Dontaskme wrote:
SpheresOfBalance wrote:The only reason nothingness seems impossible is because there seems to be something.
If in fact it seemed there was nothing, something would equally seem impossible.
Which has no necessary bearing on the case at hand, as it would seem the question is still far larger than humanity is capable of reaching.
We cannot currently 'know' that something can't come from nothing, or that nothing can't come from something.
How necessarily complete/incomplete is something or nothing?
'We' cannot know any-'thing', for 'we' ARE the known 'thing'. Only the known, is known, not the knower of the known, for knower and known are inseparably one.Therefore, there is only one unknowable knower knowing itself. One knows itself as all pervading yet without location or space to fill. The One knows itself as absolute power – absolute presence, yet nothing to effect.
We know that the knower knows what is known but does not know the knower, which is unknown to the knower (apart from the parts that knowers know about their known selves) and also don't know other knowers who in turn don't other knowers. The upshot? Nobody knows.
I don't 'know' exactly what you're trying to say but it brings to mind this:

Humans are four:
They who know not, and know not they know not;
They who know not, and know they know not;
They who know and know not they know;
They who know and know they know.

And:

One can't know what they don't know, so how can they truly say they know?

And so then:

Socrates: 'I only know that I know nothing.'
User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5688
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by SpheresOfBalance »

Conde Lucanor wrote:
SpheresOfBalance wrote: Your self centered-ness screams absurdity!
Too bad you cannot find a logical argument to prove it.
I didn't need to, your words definitely conveyed it!
User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5688
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by SpheresOfBalance »

Dontaskme wrote:
SpheresOfBalance wrote:The only reason nothingness seems impossible is because there seems to be something.
If in fact it seemed there was nothing, something would equally seem impossible.
Which has no necessary bearing on the case at hand, as it would seem the question is still far larger than humanity is capable of reaching.
We cannot currently 'know' that something can't come from nothing, or that nothing can't come from something.
How necessarily complete/incomplete is something or nothing?
'We' cannot know any-'thing',
Speak for yourself.

thing1 [thing]
noun 1. a material object without life or consciousness; an inanimate object.

know1 [noh]
verb (used with object), knew, known, knowing.
1. to perceive or understand as fact or truth; to apprehend clearly and with certainty: I know the situation fully.


I 'know' many 'things.'

for 'we' ARE the known 'thing'.
You, are the known thing to you and I am the known thing to me, as much as we actually know ourselves. But we a especially advanced things in this universe, which has, in one way or another, created us to know ourselves and things as much as it has made us capable to do so, where capability is ongoing as to completion.

Only the known, is known, not the knower of the known,
You seem to be both redundant and contradicting yourself here, please expound!

for knower and known are inseparably one.
Only from the largest macro level, which no one can currently know complete, if at all.

Therefore, there is only one unknowable knower knowing itself.
That we are of the universe doesn't necessarily mean this. I would say that you cannot necessarily know this, rather that, with our current level of knowing, it might 'seem' to be the case, but even then, you fail to account for time.

One knows itself as all pervading yet without location or space to fill.
Is this, aka, Barbara Brooks? Because you are certainly starting to sound like her.

The One knows itself as absolute power
No human knows itself fully and has practically no real power at all. Of course no puny human can say this of the universe with certainty either.
– absolute presence, yet nothing to effect.
As to humans, not true, as humans can be a causal that effects, whether we are effects of the universe or not, as cause and effect are a very long chain of events indeed, probably more like a web or net. And as for the universe, well, it would seem at present you and I are unqualified to do anything other than speculate.
User avatar
Conde Lucanor
Posts: 846
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2013 2:59 am

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Conde Lucanor »

SpheresOfBalance wrote:
Conde Lucanor wrote:
SpheresOfBalance wrote: Your self centered-ness screams absurdity!
Too bad you cannot find a logical argument to prove it.
I didn't need to, your words definitely conveyed it!
Nop. It's more than likely that you can't, considering what you have done so far. Reminds me of the old fable of the fox and the grapes.
User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5688
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by SpheresOfBalance »

Conde Lucanor wrote:
SpheresOfBalance wrote:
Conde Lucanor wrote: Too bad you cannot find a logical argument to prove it.
I didn't need to, your words definitely conveyed it!
Nop. It's more than likely that you can't, considering what you have done so far. Reminds me of the old fable of the fox and the grapes.
No, you're not worth it! ;-)
It reminds me of you and your argument on UFO's. On that note, here's a video you can watch. If you do, tell me what you think of your arguments then. If you don't, I'm sure you'll provide some sort of excuse that at least you believe is acceptable. Watch it complete, because I don't want to hear about your half assed attempt. If you do and give a reasonable response, I may consider you more than simply a Bullshitter. You know, a real thinking entity!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wU1skMUfzeU
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Greta »

SpheresOfBalance wrote:
Greta wrote:
Dontaskme wrote:
'We' cannot know any-'thing', for 'we' ARE the known 'thing'. Only the known, is known, not the knower of the known, for knower and known are inseparably one.Therefore, there is only one unknowable knower knowing itself. One knows itself as all pervading yet without location or space to fill. The One knows itself as absolute power – absolute presence, yet nothing to effect.
We know that the knower knows what is known but does not know the knower, which is unknown to the knower (apart from the parts that knowers know about their known selves) and also don't know other knowers who in turn don't other knowers. The upshot? Nobody knows.
I don't 'know' exactly what you're trying to say but it brings to mind this:

Humans are four:
They who know not, and know not they know not;
They who know not, and know they know not;
They who know and know not they know;
They who know and know they know.

And:

One can't know what they don't know, so how can they truly say they know?

And so then:

Socrates: 'I only know that I know nothing.'
'Twas a mysterious post indeed, Spheres!

Never mind, I know I can help since, if we know that we know that the knower knows what is known but does not know the knower (being largely unknown to the knower) then we know that nobody knows, for if anyone knew then the unknown would be known, in which case it would not be unknown any more and if the unknown becomes the known, then the knower knows the known unknown remains unknown.

I trust that the above will make all crystal clear.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Dontaskme »

Greta wrote:

Never mind, I know I can help since, if we know that we know that the knower knows what is known but does not know the knower (being largely unknown to the knower) then we know that nobody knows, for if anyone knew then the unknown would be known, in which case it would not be unknown any more and if the unknown becomes the known, then the knower knows the known unknown remains unknown.

I trust that the above will make all crystal clear.
Thanks Greta, very clear.

The point is. There cannot be an unknown, an unknown can never be. If an unknown were possible.. then it would be known.

My two penny worth :wink: :D
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Dontaskme »

Dontaskme wrote:
Thanks Greta, very clear.

The point is. There cannot be an unknown, an unknown can never be. If an unknown were possible.. then it would be known.

My two penny worth :wink: :D
And for the benefit of Hobbes who doesn't know his knower from his known.

The knower only shows at the exact same instant it is known informed by knowledge. The knower is born of the knowledge as ONLY knowledge informs WHAT IS. The knower doesn't exist until the knowledge is there... information / known...

Knowing, knower and known are ONE....in the same instant, namely NOW.. the only place there is.

And knowledge is illusory since it is comprised of symbols and sound which are empty, however, there is an energy that attaches itself to the concepts as if those concepts are real things in and of themselves....But it's all the play of light, everything that appears to be real is an auditory and optical illusion of sound and light.

But they do not teach you this in school, and the reason being is they do not want you to know the truth. The people who deceive the innate natural creativity of each unique living being by squeezing them into a tight little box of conformity of their own making, while at the same time duping them into believing that they are nobody until they become someone in the world ...well, they are the ones who need corrective medication for their apparent misguided mentalities, such teachings as to mislead others into false belief systems that go against their very natural and intelligent creative abilities...is the sickness that is the human being.
User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5688
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by SpheresOfBalance »

Greta wrote:
SpheresOfBalance wrote:
Greta wrote: We know that the knower knows what is known but does not know the knower, which is unknown to the knower (apart from the parts that knowers know about their known selves) and also don't know other knowers who in turn don't other knowers. The upshot? Nobody knows.
I don't 'know' exactly what you're trying to say but it brings to mind this:

Humans are four:
They who know not, and know not they know not;
They who know not, and know they know not;
They who know and know not they know;
They who know and know they know.

And:

One can't know what they don't know, so how can they truly say they know?

And so then:

Socrates: 'I only know that I know nothing.'
'Twas a mysterious post indeed, Spheres!

Never mind, I know I can help since, if we know that we know that the knower knows what is known but does not know the knower (being largely unknown to the knower) then we know that nobody knows, for if anyone knew then the unknown would be known, in which case it would not be unknown any more and if the unknown becomes the known, then the knower knows the known unknown remains unknown.

I trust that the above will make all crystal clear.
I would say that it's always best to ensure that what one attempts to convey is easily understood so as to ensure complete conveyance. It would seem that at least some rehearse trying to cloud easy understanding so as to give the false impression that what they are attempting to convey has merit. It's the difference between one actually being smart, and trying to convince others that one is smart. Not that I'm necessarily pointing any fingers, mind you. It would just seem that what you are attempting to convey could be said in a much clearer manner. As it currently stands it seems to contain contradiction. Of course it's also true that I have only given your words the same amount of time that I normally would any text, plus only a slight bit more. I could spend more time, but I'd rather move along to other topics. Of course I always do appreciate your time, thanks! ;-)
Post Reply