2007-03-23 17:22:12 · 5 answers · asked by The Knowledge Server 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
I believe that unity is most definately indistinguishable from nothingness. Unity would be to have peace, and a sence of calm. Now that's not nothing.
2007-03-24 12:17:55 · answer #1 · answered by Corinne 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That nothingness as a unity, having indiscernible parts in its oneness is a unity of an unidentifiable kind. Only this unidentifiable unity is indistinguishable from nothing; non-being only possibility.
2007-03-24 20:53:57 · answer #2 · answered by Psyengine 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nothingness is always distinguishable from unity... but the reverse is not true... whatever is indistinguishable from nothingness is not necessarily unity unless you equate unity with existence as such... unity in my view is more than existence.
2007-03-25 07:07:34 · answer #3 · answered by small 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
that's a nonsense philosophical view... how can we not identify nothingness from unity.... first nothing is un-existing, hollow or ZERO, unity is composed of more than one, unity is being one, so its not zero it has something not nothingness
they may be, some say, similar because both situations convey peace and in-controversy (boring)
2007-03-27 22:46:55 · answer #4 · answered by tutero_k 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I can but disagree.
2007-03-24 00:26:10 · answer #5 · answered by Wax Crayon 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋