This looks like a logical fallacy to me. Firstly, just because the absence would be present and real, wouldn't make it reality, just because it simply is a different thing. Secondly, before this, you seem to take the premise that what is present and real is reality. Making a logical reasoning seems illogical considering that logic only applies within our reality (assuming otherwise is not logical), and this reality does not exist in the scenario described.Likewise, if the pure presence of Reality Itself were ABSOLUTELY absent, the 'irreducible absolute absence' that would therefore remain would be just as PURE, PRESENT and REAL as the pure presence of Reality Itself. — Relinquish
How? To be honest, you lost me there. Some of the living things are conscious. Non-living things aren't. Therefore the universe is a living organism. Sorry, can't see how this works.This basic fact indicates — Relinquish
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.