English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-07-19 05:33:35 · 16 answers · asked by ★Greed★ 7 in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

16 answers

That's an interesting question.

You are asking about the relationship between language and "reality". In order for people to think and communicate about things, we use language. Before we can talk about things, even conditions that don't exist, such as "nothing", we have to use words to make "things" that don't exist (such as "nothing"), appear to exist. (See? I just did it!) Then we can comment about it.

So, in order to define "no thing", we have to treat it as though it were "something".

But a definition is just a way of talking about something else, like a map is a way of depicting a road. You can change the map, but the road doesn't change. In the same way, you can treat "nothing" as though it existed as an actual condition by using words to define it as a concept. But doing it, doesn't actually change the reality of "nothing" into something that actually exists.

So the answer to your question according to this thinking is "No".

2006-07-19 06:11:08 · answer #1 · answered by Joe_D 6 · 1 2

This is sort of like having 'up' without having 'down'. You wouldn't be able to define one without the other. Up is the opposite of down. We use words and phrases to describe other words and concepts, and 'nothing' is just the counterpart of some other something.

Now in terms of existence, I suppose thats another argument altogether that I'm not terribly educated on at this point.

2006-07-19 13:13:31 · answer #2 · answered by jaxmiry 2 · 0 0

NO

By definition the nothing is nothing, and if you mean in your second half, that nothing is the "It" that we are describing, or defining by the one, then it is still nothing as it was previously.

However the definition of the one nothing could be a description of the amount of nothings that one could be describing.

Such as one amount of money equal to nothing.

So No, it is still nothing.

2006-07-19 16:25:54 · answer #3 · answered by zack32460 3 · 0 0

You are getting into the properties of existence which are freaking aweasome...okay this is how they work.
First there is AOE=area of existence(the area in which one exists)
Well forget that whole theroy (even though it would help explain AOZ a bit better but whatever) becuz you want to know how nothing can exist! RIGHT!
AOZ= area of zero
Lets say i have zero apples.
The area in this problem would be "I"
Now lets say i say "there are no apples"...this means there are no apples any where...making that stament false!

The thing is zero can not exist with out an area in which nothing exists.
More examples...
If you have zero pencils in your hand...that is AOZ, zero can exist with in this area(or any area)....but to say" there are zero pencils" is complety false or they would not exist any where!
The AOE is a rule for real numbers. If you can concept AOZ just thinking for two secs. can make you come up with AOE.
The point of AOZ is to say if nothing ever existed it would have to have an area to exist with in.
Okay thats enough therotical BS
peace?

2006-07-19 12:47:33 · answer #4 · answered by Eternal Nihilist 1 · 0 0

My definition of nothing is that which is not real for now and the future. You can't do nothing with something that you can't create. So
nothing is something that has not yet come to existence and probably never will.

2006-07-19 13:31:35 · answer #5 · answered by lucky 4 · 0 0

Once you mention or talk about something, you bring that something into existence, therefore if you define "nothing", then "nothing" exists, and by existing, it is no longer nothing. Nothing is something.

2006-07-19 13:08:59 · answer #6 · answered by Belindita 5 · 0 0

If someone defines nothing, the definition alone would make it something.

2006-07-19 15:43:40 · answer #7 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

Nothing is a concept, like zero or infinity or what have you. We, human beings that is, could not conceive of true nothing, it is beyond us. (I imagine the pun this creates--that NOTHING is beyond us--will overjoy all you optimists out there). Everything is just symbols in language, so my answer is no, otherwise I detract from the language and I, for one, believe language to be the greatest achievment of Man.

2006-07-19 12:40:22 · answer #8 · answered by Alobar 5 · 0 0

it already is defined in any dictionary

it's the lack or absence of anything

nothing is in fact nothing, even if defined

allthough the word itself is something

2006-07-19 12:38:06 · answer #9 · answered by downdrain 4 · 0 0

nothing is a word, a word is a group of letters, it takes action to make a word come alive , a definition is something that people gave the word, nothing is nothing

2006-07-19 12:42:55 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers