2. The existence of something implies an innate potential for something to exist. If there is no innate potential for something to exist, nothing can exist. — Randy333
I feel like everyone on this thread is assuming the world could be necessary. Meta-reality is spiritual and so is not a thing, or even an accident like potentiality. Hegel spoke of quantity coming from quality, but he also took into consideration Zenos paradoxes — Gregory
Wouldn't a meta-reality require a creature to view or percieve a "fake" world? — christian2017
How do you feel about collective conceeeence or collective soul? — christian2017
Wouldn't a meta-reality require a creature to view or percieve a "fake" world?
— christian2017
If it is necessary nothingness, than no. I think absolute time and space is this nothingness
How do you feel about collective conceeeence or collective soul?
— christian2017
Our souls are not substances. Only material things are. So I think you can say we are all one. One piece of nothing, to be more precise. But you are your body. You are not both your soul and your body — Gregory
If modal realism is true, then the “innate potential for reality to exist” just consists of the trivial fact that there is no possible world at which there is no world, i.e. at every possible world there is some world, so some world or another existing is not only possible, but necessary. There couldn’t have been nothing. — Pfhorrest
Questions (and answers) are not separable from semantics. — Janus
Rearranging words to answer a question either shows the answer to be trivially true or isn't a meaningful answer. It's just a word game. — Marchesk
You are correct. You basically argued for the truth of ex nihilo nihil fitWould any atheists care to try to explain how the cosmogonic potential for reality’s existence can authentically be deemed nothingness? — Randy333
Existence is (a posteriori) metaphysically necessary. — Relativist
Nothing, in the narrowest, most authentic sense of the word, implies literally no thing whatsoever – not just no material objects. — Randy333
Correct- the op argument only establishes a posteriori necessity.Existence is (a posteriori) metaphysically necessary.
— Relativist
Not a priori? Then what does this answer? — Gregory
Zero energy models assume a quantum system exists. That ain't nothing.The zero-energy model says there is no energy in the world. I don't agree with it, but that is smart people saying nothingness CAN exist. — Gregory
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.