They're both illogical because both expresses an idea as so, while at the same time expressing it as not. 'Nothing' is a false idea.
A better term would be, "There isn't what there isn't" And, "There is what there is"
A term cannot be used to describe something when it's not anything. ;) Otherwise, that would mean it was something. Therefore, "There isn't what there isn't"
2007-01-20 13:23:36
·
answer #1
·
answered by Source 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Nothingness is the absence of existence. So it is something only in it's being naught. If it was truly nothing in it's entirety, then there wouldn't even be a word for it. It would be more true, then, to say "There isn't a thing". By referring to it at all, one is giving it substance.
2007-01-20 21:21:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by marklemoore 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
The two languages are different, and have differing modes of expression. In each language the expession works perfectly well.
2007-01-20 21:16:40
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
when some people ask questions there is nothing logical about them so it must be spanish
2007-01-20 21:18:34
·
answer #4
·
answered by james o 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
i think nothing is being improperly used in your sentence.
it should be: There isn't anything.
nothing = no thing
isn't = is not
so therefor There isn't nothing = There is not no thing
2007-01-20 21:22:23
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
"no hay nada" clothes, man! COVER YOURSELF!! Ugh.
2007-01-20 21:16:42
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I definitely want some of what you're on. lol :)
2007-01-20 21:18:51
·
answer #7
·
answered by AceT 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Doesn't matter
2007-01-20 21:19:15
·
answer #8
·
answered by STFU Dude 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
What are you smoking?
2007-01-20 21:16:19
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
whatever
2007-01-20 21:27:10
·
answer #10
·
answered by one day at a time 2
·
0⤊
0⤋