/lit/ - Literature

Because I experience something

i dunno lol

Nothing is impossible.

>Never will this prevail, that what is not is--bar your thought from this road of inquiry.

Because there can't be just nothing. Nothing needs something or it's not nothing, it's something else. They are complementary.

Please clarify which you mean:

"What do you believe causes there to be something rather than nothing?"
or
"What causes you to believe there is something rather than nothing?"

It's a lovely hypothesis to explore, but, ultimately, not one I feel any necessity to make.

Imagined or otherwise, I'm content to lay back and bask in the warm glow of existence.

>implying deep down this something isn't actually just nothing

>>2872225

It has to be random, because even if there is an infinite regression of causes then that itself still seems random.

>>2872225

>Because there can't be just nothing. Nothing needs something or it's not nothing, it's something else. They are complementary.

That just seems like a language game. The words don't make sense without each other, but that seems more like a limitation inherent to language rather than a real answer.

After all, where did this cosmic axiom that something must exist come from? You see, it just pushes back the question without answering it.

First you need to tell me what it would mean for nothing to be.

>>2872259

Isn't nothing the absence of 'be'?

>>2872247

I shouldn't say that the words "nothing" and "something" don't make sense without each other, but that one implies the other.

>>2872260
OP is the one asking why there is not nothing. The question implies that it is possible for nothing to exist.

>>2872264

No, he is asking why anything exists. Don't confuse the issue.

because things that are not can't be,. Because then nothing wouldn't be, you can't have fucking nothing isn't.

>implying nothing and something aren't the same.

>>2872276

Well, that is not obvious, but if that is somehow right then that just leaves the question of what "it" is.

>>2872247
The answer is not answering.

And this is not lazy thinking, this is the answer.

>>2872271
No, OP is asking why something (not anything) exists, as opposed to nothing, implying that it is possible for nothing to exist. I'm not confusing the issue.

I have no idea op and it's not a question that can really be answered.

Nothing is impossible to imagine and describe because the second you try and do that you're creating something. If you were to try and imagine nothing, you would most likely imagine total black but that is something.

It's hard to get your head around the fact that it seems like there has to be a beginning to something. Nothing cannot produce something because it's nothing, it doesn't exist.

Nothing seems to be irrelevant, it has no meaning to us.

I'd rather try figure out how is something, something.

>>2872280
One.

God damn it. Stop with the "but nothing can't exist by definition" bullshit. You're right in that "nothing" does not exist, but that still doesn't explain why anything IS.

Nothing already doesn't exist. It's not a matter of existence existing or non-existence existing, because non-existence already doesn't exist, it's not-going on right not-alongside existence, but that doesn't explain existence.

>>2872291
also Zero.

>>2872293
I'm this guy >>2872283 as you can see, that's what I want to know.

>>2872291

Call it what you want, that explains nothing. Don't get me wrong, I'm not expecting one from you, I just hate the faux wisdom dripping from your posts.

>>2872282

>No, OP is asking why something (not anything) exists, as opposed to nothing, implying that it is possible for nothing to exist

It was a clumsy wording of the question, and it's possible that I am giving OP too much credit, but I'm pretty sure you are misinterpreting his question.

Your question is invalid. In order to be observing something, a priori you must exist. Whether there is "something" or "nothing" depends just on what you mean by those words.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQJoCTZUPrk

>>2872293
I can't explain to you why there is something without knowing what it means for there to be nothing. I'm sorry.

I think a much more interesting and pertinent question is why what is what it is.

>>2872302
Op's question, I think, is this. How does something exist

>>2872293
>but that doesn't explain existence

it can't be explained. every explanation assumes something that exists.

>>2872308
>How does something exist

By allowing us to observe/experience it

>>2872307
I would guess, that if something didn't exist, nothing would exist at all. Universes, being, matter etc would not exist. There would be no just black landscape. I have no idea if this is possible it's hard to contemplate.

>>2872297
Call it what you want, some call it god. Don't take all answers too seriously. There is an infinite amount of answers to questions that cannot be answered in this present form. This is just one possibility. If the opportunity presented itself for you and me to sit face to face to discuss this, I'd like to take it because though an image-board, its very difficult. Its difficult as it is anyhow.

>>2872312

I know, I was just raging against the "but nothing doesn't exist by definition so hurr". It's a stupid observation.

>>2872320
>"but nothing doesn't exist by definition so hurr"

Who was saying this? I think you're stupidly misinterpreting things.

The world exist because of causal conditions which gave rise to the world

>>2872319

Whatever you say, chief.

>>2872323
says you

>>2872320
It's not really a stupid observation because most people don't think of nothing as nothing. People imagine nothingness to still hold a small amount of substance, like a black plain.

It get's people thinking.

>>2872323

What are causal conditions? Are you talking about some kind of Platonism?

Something can't be seen without the nothing and vice versa.

>>2872329
NO, he's talking about the things that will be explained by Science, lol.

>>2872330
Nothing cannot contain something

Something cannot contain nothing

>>2872335

You shouldn't be laughing, you are the stupid one, as you clearly don't understand my question.

For conditions to exist something has to exist. So saying that existence is around because of causal conditions is basically like saying that the universe gave birth to itself, which is the same as saying..I dunno...it happened just well, because.

All we know is that there is something. Any further explanation is superfluous.

>>2872340
It begs the question.

Where did something come from. Something can't come from nothing but something is here. How did this happen!?

>>2872343

No kidding.

: /

>>2872341
It isn't superfluous. Why not try and discover how if it's interesting? why not?

>>2872345
I don't think it's an interesting question.

Like I said earlier, a much more interesting thing to ask would be why what is what it is.

>>2872194
Has anyone actually read this novel? I saw the interview with the author on charlie rose. I was just wondering if it is any good.

>>2872345

He's in denial.

>it's not a big deal guys, nothing to lose sleep over, death and all of that...no big deal....I don't even care...

>>2872347

Same here, I was thinking of buying it but it's kinda pricey.

>>2872349
Yeah, no. The question hardly makes any sense and clearly can't be answered. I simply don't see the point.

>>2872357

Yeah, no. Yeah, yeah.

>>2872359
I've already explained why it is a meaningless question. Why does this upset you so much?

>>2872364

I will swing on you. Hard.

I have precognitive dreams and have had experiences with spirits.

deal with it

>>2872368
Hahaha, you guys.

>>2872346
Why what is what is, seems like a question to be asked AFTER we figured out how is came into being is.

>>2872371
Alcoholism is a disease, you should get help.

>>2872371
Dream characters may be spirits or may just be dream characters made by your mind.

They may be beings from another dimension that you interact with in your dreams because when one dreams they enter an alternate dimension from there waking life dimension and the dimensions are made up of every possible thing that you could have done from birth.

They may be MANY things. Why you choose to believe they are spirits seems foolish.

>>2872379
I don't see why you aren't a solipsist.

>>2872379
i didn't say anything about them not being beings from another dimension.

that's really what spirits are actually

>>2872382
I am one with everything. Everything that is something is connected to me and I to that something.

So I am you, you're me, we're everything. My dreams are real because they are something.

I believe the self is the only thing that exist's and the self is EVERYTHING!

>>2872368
Here, let me break it down for you. Let's say you asked me, "Why is this apple red?" It is not at all difficult for me to give you some kind of explanation for that, because I know quite well what it would mean for the apple to be not-red. However, you're asking me "Why is there something?" I have difficulty with this, and question whether or not it's meaningful to ask, because I am not sure what it would mean for there to be not-something. Understand?

>>2872372
>Why what is what is, seems like a question to be asked AFTER we figured out how is came into being is.

No, we seem to be getting along fine doing it my way.

>>2872390
Good point man, I apologize for that one.

>>2872393
We? Who else are you speaking for?

>>2872403
The people who are trying to explain why what is what it is.

>>2872411
I still think these people should start with how before why.

>>2872303
Good video. I just really really hate the music.

>>2872389

>I am one with everything. Everything that is something is connected to me and I to that something. So I am you, you're me, we're everything. My dreams are real because they are something.

This seems like another piece of faux wisdom. No one would deny that both you and I are both a part of the same system, but we are still different people. We each exist in isolated bubbles of subjective experience that while they both separate and connect us, ultimately make us different personalities. So yes, we are related, and we share a kinship in that we both exist but...I am not you.

non-dualism sucks so bad

>>2872439

http://youtu.be/ssf7P-Sgcrk

I prefer this one.

>>2872447
I'm not him, but it's kind of harsh to throw around "faux wisdom".

Your head is connected to your arm, so you think of them as one of the same, even though they can be separated. When you see yourself part of a group or a society, you function as a particle, a fraction of a bigger whole. When you're facing some inner struggle you might feel divided, split in half between two things. All of these are notions of identity and they are pretty fluid, they change our attitude based on our frame of mind. So I think there is a point, like he said, in saying you and I (and him) are the same thing. We just love not to think so and this is such a strong feel we carry it in our language.

>>2872447
Ah but you and I are connected. Everything in existence is connected. It's an illusion that we aren't. In other words, we're a whole but it seems like we aren't.

Like the illusion of America and Australia being not connected, when really water creates the illusion of separation.

Have you ever experienced the loss of your ego? It's a fucking weird experience, there is no you, what ever your name is. You don't think of yourself as billio, you're just a body that can think of doing things but you don't have a personality, it's just empty.

Have you ever felt one with someone, usually happens on drugs like lsd?

>>2872448
Nothing seems to disprove dualism

I know very well that there is no I, and nothing to know. My name is john (there is no john) my experience was I did not experience anything (nothing exists). The exoticism of an awakening experience, its setting or apparent cause or context, means absolutely nothing. (non)awakening happened (didn't happen) in of all places (there are no places), in my own bathroom.

>this is non-dualist "logic" now you know why eastern "thought" has never been taken seriously in western philosophy

i had a dream last night, the details are fuzzy but i remember this woman saying she could experience everything every human was consciously experiencing

>>2872481
So that was you I was talking to in my dream last night.

how is the action built into the hunting?

OP here. This is the interview that prompted the thread, for anyone that's interested:
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/12487

why is a meaningless word, a very specific 'how' that concerns human motivation.

but to answer this, nothing can't be by definition.