Philosophy Now Forum

bobmax wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 8:10 am

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 7:43 am

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 7:15 am There is no nothingness. Even vaccuum spaces are actually not vaccuums, but have particles/antiparticle pairs and energies flitting in and out of existence. As Quantum Physics claims.

When there is a 'space' and for the moment where the particles/antiparticle pairs and energies are not in existence, then what is that 'space' if it is not a 'vacuum space'?

Existence consists in the continuous play of opposites.

Like the one between empty and full.

Opposites give meaning to existence. But in themselves ... they don't exist.

I look for matter and I find vacuum, I look for vacumm and I find matter.

This is the game of Being, the game of Nothingness.

bobmax wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 8:10 am

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 7:43 am

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 7:15 am There is no nothingness. Even vaccuum spaces are actually not vaccuums, but have particles/antiparticle pairs and energies flitting in and out of existence. As Quantum Physics claims.

When there is a 'space' and for the moment where the particles/antiparticle pairs and energies are not in existence, then what is that 'space' if it is not a 'vacuum space'?

Existence consists in the continuous play of opposites.

Like the one between empty and full.

Opposites give meaning to existence. But in themselves ... they don't exist.

I look for matter and I find vacuum, I look for vacumm and I find matter.

This is the game of Being, the game of Nothingness.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 7:15 am

socrat44 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 07, 2022 12:16 pm Being = Nothingness/Emptiness, is true only in the Cosmic Vacuum, as Quantum Physics claims.

There is no nothingness. Even vaccuum spaces are actually not vaccuums, but have particles/antiparticle pairs and energies flitting in and out of existence. As Quantum Physics claims.

bobmax wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:08 am

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 7:15 am

socrat44 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 07, 2022 12:16 pm Being = Nothingness/Emptiness, is true only in the Cosmic Vacuum, as Quantum Physics claims.

There is no nothingness. Even vaccuum spaces are actually not vaccuums, but have particles/antiparticle pairs and energies flitting in and out of existence. As Quantum Physics claims.

Vacuum is not the Nothingness.

Because the vacuum is, and is only, the space where something could have been.

But isn't space itself this alternation of vacuum and matter?

For the Big Bang theory, space and time are born.

Therefore the universe is not in a vacuum. The universe is nowhere.

Nothing surrounds him.

But if so...
The universe itself is Nothing.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 10:54 am The Big Bang theory, at least these days, is unclear about whether this space adn time started there or if there is a greater metaverse where time had already been running or...and there are a number of hypotheses there. I don't see how your final deduction works...
BB had the birth of time and space
Therefore(????) the universe is not in a vaccuum.
The universe is nowhere.
Nothing surrounds him (it?)
But if so....
The universe itself is nothing.

To me that doesn't logically follow. Not the conclusion, nor some of the middle steps.

bobmax wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 11:45 am You're right.

What I write cannot make sense.

This happens because rational thought does not admit the existence of limits to its possibilities of understanding.

However, these limits exist and do not concern the power of the intellect. Rather, they are the limits of logic itself.
For which to be there = to be.

We can only think of being there.
But if we go out into the world, in search of the truth, then we inevitably find ourselves faced with the insurmountable limit.

For rationality this absolute limit does not exist. When rational thought comes across it considers it relative: sooner or later it will overcome it.

Instead there are insuperable limits.

For example, faced with the birth of time and space, rational thinking inevitably imagines another time and another space where this universe was born.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 11:54 am absolutely believe that rationality has limits and much of what I know is not via reasoned processes.

But you are presenting things in your post as reasoned processes. You might leave out words like 'Therefore...' and 'But if so...' and 'Because...'
All that presents itself as a rational, here deductive, process and intended to engage the rationality of other minds. Drop that stuff and find another approach that makes it clear you are stating your intuitions or however you frame it.

And then perhaps a philosophy forum will be an odd place for these posts, since it is words on a screen and it is implied heavily one is being rational and using rational arguments.

I mean, I do have a part of my mind, you could say, that sort of thinks this. But that's just a part of me. And even that part has reached limits over and over I think gets it.