The Nihilsum Concept

mlles

The "Nihilsum" represents a state that defies conventional logic by existing in a realm between what we establish as being and non-being. It cannot be fully categorized as something or nothing; it is also the absence of either. So, it challenges the binary system of categorization of being. The entities (' ') concept calls for a new term to describe this state, one that isn't captured by traditional notions of existence or non. This Nihilsum, is a construct that transcends the conventional limits of thought. This post explores the this "Nihilsum" which can be more easily referred to as (' '), not as an entity or a state, but as a meta-logical construct that defies traditional logic and ontological frameworks. This post aims to establish the premises for this concept and provide a further investigation into how ' ' (which we can refer to as its more accessible name of the Nihilsum for the rest of the post interacts with existing philosophical ways of thinking and/or thought, particularly in the realm of postmodernism and ontology.

With the Nihilsum comes a familiar comparison, the concept of the 'void', which implies a complete absence, but the Nihilsum resists being labeled as merely a lack of existence. It is a state that both is and is not simultaneously, without fully asserting either/or, so it cannot be comparable to the void. You could say this Nihilsum wills itself to be an ontological rejection of clear definitions of being and the lack of. It's rhizomatic.

The Nihilsum is somewhat metalogical, as you can see from the introduction. One of the 'defining' features of the Nihilsum is its resistance to being captured by formal logic. Notably, the principle of non-contradiction dictates that something cannot be both true and false, or both existent and non-existent. However, the Nihilsum operates outside these two boundaries(thus asserting it as meta logical). It cannot be fully explained or categorized by traditional logical systems. In a world where logical systems are fundamental to understanding truth and existence, the Nihilsum is to logic an anomaly that forces us to reconsider the limits of reason and the possibility of paradoxical truths.

The Nihilsum aligns with postmodern thought by rejecting fixed categories of identity, existence, and meaning. Where traditional philosophies sought to define the nature of being, the Nihilsum undermines these efforts by introducing a noncategorical existence. Differance and the endless play of meanings within language suggest that truth is never fixed, and meaning is always deferred. The Nihilsum could operatee in a similar manner, defying any final or stable definitions by its 'infinite' nature of attempting to categorize it to a set of words. Each attempt to define the Nihilsum leads to further complications. We try to say what it is but only expose more contradictions.

The Nihilsum can be interpreted as an extension of existential ambiguity by the absence of a fixed identity and a space of potentiality. The Nihilsum embodies the paradox of freedom, where we confront both the possibility of existence and its inherent nonsense. The Nihilsum can represent a state where existence cannot be fully categorized. It does not negate existence; instead, it can transcend the need to categorize what existence is. If existence is not defined in conventional terms, how can we apply fixed ethical frameworks to human life? In this given world where existence is to be fluid, these ethical frameworks must be contextual and open to interpretation, resisting the imposition of universal standards.

So, through this examination, I'm trying to offer a paradoxical space where being and non-being are not opposites but co-exist in a tension that cannot be resolved within traditional frameworks. Through exploring postmodern thought, existentialism, and ontological speculation, the Nihilsum provides a lens through which we can reconsider existence and the limits of logic. I think it potentially lacks practical application, and I am also having trouble articulating this well, so my apologies for anything unclear, but I am most interested in speculation about this or just a complete rejection of this concept.

T Clark

↪mlles

Welcome to The forum.

I’m sure I’m not the only one who was confused when I started reading your post. I thought you were talking about nihilism but misspelled it, but after reading the first paragraph, it became clear you were talking about something different. But you never really described what it was, what the word meant, where it came from. You talk about Nihilsum but you never define it. Even after reading the entire post, I’m not sure exactly what you’re talking about. Is this a word you made up?

From what I can tell from your description, it sounds like something similar to Lao Tzu’s Tao or other non-dualistic philosophies. You should provide more information.

mlles

↪T Clark

Thank you.

The Nihilsum attempts a neologism combining the Latin nihil and sum. I can now see I sort of just dived in straight from the start. The Nihilsum would be a concept that exists(or of existence) between the categories of something and nothing by being neither fully one nor the other but instead exists as a paradox that resists clear categorization. I'm trying to say it is itself which creates this paradox of clear definition. It's not definite.

Joshs

↪mlles

The "Nihilsum" represents a state that defies conventional logic by existing in a realm between what we establish as being and non-being. It cannot be fully categorized as something or nothing; it is also the absence of either — mlles

This does accord with poststructuralist accounts putting difference before identity , and Heidegger’s attempt to think being and nothingness together. Heidegger constantly struggled to come up with an adequate way of articulating a notion of transit, othering and difference that the grammatical structure of language mitigates against, an essencing which is neither simply present nor absent, neither something nor nothing, neither future, now nor past, being nor becoming, good nor evil.

Glad to see you on the forum. Self-proclaimed postmodernists are very rare on this site, unfortunately. Do you think your notion of Nihilsum provides a way to critique empirical realism?

mlles

↪Joshs

Do you think your notion of Nihilsum provides a way to critique empirical realism? — Joshs

The Nihilsum would reveal how empirical realism obscures what exists outside of clear definitions and also resists being stapled as something or nothing and, in doing so, critiques the very attempt to reduce the richness of reality to resolved notions.

jkop

empirical realism obscures what exists outside of clear definitions and also resists being stapled as something or nothing and, in doing so, critiques the very attempt to reduce the richness of reality to resolved notions. — mlles

Postmodern fear of knowledge.

Corvus

the Nihilsum provides a lens through which we can reconsider existence and the limits of logic. — mlles

What does existence and being mean under the Nihilsum?

and the limits of logic — mlles

What does the Nihilsum propose the solution for the problem?

Joshs

↪jkop

Postmodern fear of knowledge. — jkop

Realist fear of postmodernism.

Patterner

The Nihilsum would be a concept that exists(or of existence) between the categories of something and nothing by being neither fully one nor the other but instead exists as a paradox that resists clear categorization. — mlles

Everyone please bear with me. As with many things at TPF, I've never heard of this.

Are you speaking of a category? Or are you speaking of things that fall within this category?

T Clark

The Nihilsum would be a concept that exists(or of existence) between the categories of something and nothing by being neither fully one nor the other but instead exists as a paradox that resists clear categorization. — mlles

As @Patterner has noted, you haven't even told us what kind of thing this is. Is it a category, a philosophy, a process, a system, a characteristic, an entity?

Moliere

↪T Clark

The "Nihilsum" represents a state that defies conventional logic by existing in a realm between what we establish as being and non-being — mlles

Seems we must conclude it's a representation of a state.

T Clark

Seems we must conclude it's a representation of a state. — Moliere

A state of what?

Moliere

↪T Clark

Maybe "of affairs"?

GrahamJ

Seems we must conclude it's a representation of a state.
— Moliere

A state of what? — T Clark

It sounds like a qubit.

A pure qubit state is a coherent superposition of the basis states. This means that a single qubit ψ can be described by a linear combination such as:
|ψ⟩=α|nonexistence⟩+β|existence⟩
where α and β are the probability amplitudes, and are both complex numbers. — adapted from wikipedia

Nils Loc

What is permissible under the banner of postmodern monkey business?

Whatever you can get away with. :snicker:

Jokes on you!

Banno

Postmodern fear of knowledge. — jkop

I'm stealing that phrase.

...defies conventional logic... — mlles

There are already well-developed systems of nonclassical logic that have at least a third value, so nothing new in that.

— adapted from wikipedia — GrahamJ

About as weak as reference as could be imagined... What the fuck is "|ψ⟩=α|nonexistence⟩+β|existence⟩"?

mlles

What does existence and being mean under the Nihilsum? — Corvus

The Nihilsum attempts to challenge the understanding of existence and being by occupying a space that is neither fully ‘something’ or ‘nothing.’ It resists the either/or of categories that we people have used to define existence. Rather than being a specific state of being, it exists as a construct, that of which is meta-logical and transcends these boundaries. Its existence lies not in what we can categorize, but in its inherent ability to defy those categories. By existing in this paradoxical ‘state,’ the Nihilsum forces us to rethink ontological frameworks, where opposites are often required to be mutually exclusive.

What does the Nihilsum propose the solution for the problem? — Corvus

The Nihilsum suggests the law of noncontradiction is insufficient to account for existence. This Nihilsum doesn’t offer a direct and definitive answer to existence but rather presents a ‘space’ where contradictions and ambiguities can exist simultaneously. This opens a realm where truth is not fixed, and meaning cannot be contained by traditional categories.

mlles

There are already well-developed systems of nonclassical logic that have at least a third value, so nothing new in that. — Banno

The Nihilsum would operate outside the boundaries of nonclassical logic though, including systems with a third value as well. It resists these fixed logical frameworks and exists in a ‘possible space’(not perhaps a physical one, but a place where new understandings can form(lacking logical struturd at all)) where paradoxes can occur without relying on true or false values. This meta logical space transcends established logic, allowing for the coexistence of contradictions.

Banno

↪mlles

Outside of both classical and nonclassical logic.

Illogical, then. Fine.

Seems to me that you are not saying much at all. Nihilsum doesn't do anything.

Last night I saw, upon the stair,
A little man who wasn't there!
He wasn't there again today,
I wish, I wish he'd go away!

mlles

Are you speaking of a category? Or are you speaking of things that fall within this category? — Patterner

neither, the nihilsum is to be beyond categorization, rather than being a 'something' or a 'nothing' it occupies a space between these, directly challenging either/or thought. The paradoxical nature is its most crucial 'attribute.'

Corvus

By existing in this paradoxical ‘state,’ the Nihilsum forces us to rethink ontological frameworks, where opposites are often required to be mutually exclusive. — mlles

Could you give some real life examples of such existences in the real world?

Hanover

The Nihilsum embodies the paradox of freedom, where we confront both the possibility of existence and its inherent nonsense. — mlles

This is the only part of your post that made sense to me. You've identified a supposedly new category and freedom is the only example you've provided that goes into this category.

Libertarian freedom is a complicated notion in that it asserts an uncaused cause and it attributes moral responsibility on that agent that originated the uncaused cause. How such a cause can arise without a cause has no good answer.

But there are many unanswerable philosophical questions, so I'm not sure what distinguishes this one.

For clarity, what other examples other than freedom fall into this category?

GrahamJ

What the fuck is "|ψ⟩=α|nonexistence⟩+β|existence⟩"? — Banno

Dumbed-down quantum theory. I guess this quote is more your level: ‘it’s very hard to talk quantum using a language originally designed to tell other monkeys where the ripe fruit is.'

Banno

Dumbed-down quantum theory. — GrahamJ

Then set out the full version.

jgill

Could you give some real life examples of such existences in the real world? — Corvus

Please do. Would some aspects of thought or ideas fall into this category? Spacetime?

jkop

Realist fear of postmodernism. — Joshs

At some universities postmodernism has become as scary as The Spanish Inquisition.

I am most interested in speculation about this or just a complete rejection of this concept. — mlles

A rejection is that you haven't described anything to speculate about but a neologism that alludes to something evasive, beyond logic etc. As curious readers we may take it as a promise of insight, but apparently it's just a word game with invisible or moving goal posts.

jgill

I've mentioned this before, but it has relevance here. There was a PhD mathematics student who investigated a class of functions for his original research project. After some time he had discovered several fascinating facts about these mathematical entities, enough for his dissertation. But he was then asked for an example of such functions. It turned out the set of functions was the empty set. I have no idea if he eventually got his degree.

Were mathematics more a kind of philosophy, he might have received his degree even if he proved much about nothing.

Wayfarer

The "Nihilsum" represents a state that defies conventional logic by existing in a realm between what we establish as being and non-being. It cannot be fully categorized as something or nothing; it is also the absence of either. — mlles

Aristotle beat you to it.

Quantum math is notorious for incorporating multiple possibilities for the outcomes of measurements. So you shouldn’t expect physicists to stick to only one explanation for what that math means. ... One of the latest interpretatations appeared recently (September 13 2017) online at arXiv.org...

In the new paper, three scientists argue that including “potential” things on the list of “real” things can avoid the counterintuitive conundrums that quantum physics poses. It is perhaps less of a full-blown interpretation than a new philosophical framework for contemplating those quantum mysteries. At its root, the new idea holds that the common conception of “reality” is too limited. By expanding the definition of reality, the quantum’s mysteries disappear. In particular, “real” should not be restricted to “actual” objects or events in spacetime. Reality ought also be assigned to certain possibilities, or “potential” realities, that have not yet become “actual.” These potential realities do not exist in spacetime, but nevertheless are “ontological” — that is, real components of existence.

“This new ontological picture requires that we expand our concept of ‘what is real’ to include an extra-spatiotemporal domain of quantum possibility,” write Ruth Kastner, Stuart Kauffman and Michael Epperson.

Considering potential things to be real is not exactly a new idea, as it was a central aspect of the philosophy of Aristotle, 24 centuries ago. An acorn has the potential to become a tree; a tree has the potential to become a wooden table. Even applying this idea to quantum physics isn’t new. Werner Heisenberg, the quantum pioneer famous for his uncertainty principle, considered his quantum math to describe potential outcomes of measurements of which one would become the actual result. The quantum concept of a “probability wave,” describing the likelihood of different possible outcomes of a measurement, was a quantitative version of Aristotle’s potential, Heisenberg wrote in his well-known 1958 book Physics and Philosophy. “It introduced something standing in the middle between the idea of an event and the actual event, a strange kind of physical reality just in the middle between possibility and reality.” — Quantum Mysteries Dissolve if Possibilities are Realities

If you think about it, the same general logic applies to the 'domain of possibility'. At any given time, in any situation, there is a finite but incalculable number of possible outcomes. All of those are real in one sense, but not existent, by definition, and ultimately only one of them becomes actual. Which is pretty well the same thing that happens in observations in quantum physics.

mlles

Aristotle beat you to it. — Wayfarer

I see but the Nihilsum would resist teleology entirely if I recall, because it is without resolution or trajectory. The Nihilsum is not about what could 'become' but about ehat exists as an in between and this in between being unresolvable. It wouldn't be moving towards any sort of resolution.

The Nihilsum is without movement or an end goal but also full of movement and the end goal teleologically. This makes it not fit into the traditionals of Aristotle.

mlles

I do see now how this Nihilsum doesn't actually provide anything for thought for lets say theoretical abstraction because it has no base at all, thus not very 'useful' or positing anything to our being and not. I also don't even think I understand it anymore or if I did, I think so but it expanded itself.

kazan

@Miles,

Congrats. You've just posited "Beyond being and nothingness" in a narrowly interpretive sense.

Do you "see" Nihilsum as being dependent upon something to enter the world of logic in order to gain recognition as a distinction between being and notbeing?

inquisitive and curious smile

The Nihilsum Concept

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions