should we assume that the absence of time, space and the universe there would be nothing
2007-03-11 12:42:34 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
According to apparitionalism the universe is just a lens through which we percieve the absolute truth. If that lens were not there, you would either percieve the truth itself, or more likely just be looking through a different lens and seeing a completely different apparition that has nothing to do with time, space, and so on.
If this were true, however, it would suggest that there is a deeper truth that is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from all of science. Keep in mind that science is based on experiment and objectivity, and therefore has NOTHING to say about anything that takes place outside of this universe. Further, this absolute would make science look like a lie, as there would be many other lenses which had nothing to do with all of scientific reasoning whatsoever.
So where is this truth? Where are all the people who can completely ignore the observations of science as the mis-perceptions of actual truth that they are? I have yet to encounter one.
Bottom line - if there were some truth deeper than all of science and logically that much more effective, I'm sure everyone would love to know what it is. But science seems to be the most effective way of making things work so far. That in itself speaks volumes about all the other supposed truths that people may argue are out there.
Peace.
2007-03-11 13:26:41 · answer #1 · answered by Doctor Why 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This question is like the question about darkness. What color is darkness? The answer according to one Yahoo'er is that darkness is not a color, it is the absence of light.
So, the answer to your questions are both, from what perspective are you looking at the Universe and the absences? Or, what are you trying to do, subdivide the Universe with a crowbar or with a pencil?
Are you including yourself in the absences, or not?
Let me ask you this, "Are you apparitional?"
2007-03-11 19:59:07 · answer #2 · answered by zclifton2 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The universe is only time and space. When space is zero, time is zero. It is at the beginning. With zero space all of energy and matter are condensed to a point. That point is the mono-block at just the point where space-time congealed. However the fabric of the space-time continuum could not contain the energy and it burst forth creating the universe.
So, at the beginning there was and was not nothing.
2007-03-11 20:18:02 · answer #3 · answered by Sophist 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Universe is an endless collection of possibilities from which we choose to come into actual manifestation, creating an illusion of objective reality. Time, space, those are nothing more than parameters used by our minds to bring specific possibilities into real manifestation. We are constructors, and we use time and space as bricks and cement.
2007-03-11 19:48:36 · answer #4 · answered by Gilgethan 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Never assume anything. You'd be wrong.
2007-03-11 19:47:42 · answer #5 · answered by producer_vortex 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There might be something, but to us, there would be nothing because we would not be anything.
2007-03-11 19:52:12 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, that would be incorrect. The creation wouldn't be here, but the creator would.
2007-03-11 19:46:06 · answer #7 · answered by Phlow 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~
There is no nothing....There is always something....We will always be....Isn't that great? âªâ« âªâ«
~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~
2007-03-11 19:55:17 · answer #8 · answered by CQ 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋