nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 52:
Line 52: +
Debate:Why is there something rather than nothing? (view source)
Revision as of 09:29, May 20, 2008
, 09:29, May 20, 2008→Yes: How can we discuss it then?
: That appears illogical. "Nothing" is the absence of anything, and as we are here, we are, by definition, "something". [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 00:40, 17 May 2008 (EDT)
: That appears illogical. "Nothing" is the absence of anything, and as we are here, we are, by definition, "something". [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 00:40, 17 May 2008 (EDT)
::But that is based on the assumption that you are observing 'something.' There is the offchance (which I do not believe), that there is nothing, and we do not exist. This is where the axiom comes in. We cannot prove the existence of the universe, we can only assume it does. It takes of stretch of the imagination to even consider it. --[[User:Capercorn]] <small> [[User Talk:Capercorn|Talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Capercorn|contribs]] </small> 13:40, 19 May 2008 (EDT)
::But that is based on the assumption that you are observing 'something.' There is the offchance (which I do not believe), that there is nothing, and we do not exist. This is where the axiom comes in. We cannot prove the existence of the universe, we can only assume it does. It takes of stretch of the imagination to even consider it. --[[User:Capercorn]] <small> [[User Talk:Capercorn|Talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Capercorn|contribs]] </small> 13:40, 19 May 2008 (EDT)
::: If we didn't exist, how could we possibly be discussing this? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 05:29, 20 May 2008 (EDT)