Is this statement illogical?

Question

1.
Unity is indiscernible if no difference is between nothingness and unity.

2.

|------(1-0)-----|
0<- ----------->1
Nothing-------Unity

The difference between unity and nothingness is as “part, whole, equivalence, uniqueness, limit, link, influence, sensation, origin, derivative, rule, condition, intent, and fulfillment.”

3.
The difference between unity and nothingness is unity
1-0 =1 = Unity
=> Unity is as “part, whole, equivalence, uniqueness, limit, link, influence, sensation, origin, derivative, rule, condition, intent, and fulfillment.”

Is this illogical?

Answer 1

Yes... conclusion drawn is logical.
However, I believe zero is different from nothingness. Zero as a concept is equilibrium where two or more separate existence cancel out each other such as positive and negative... therefore zero in my view is not the opposite of existence.... zero is qualitatively different from nothingness which is opposite of existence.

Answer 2

Free-will versus determinism. Free to learn and live. The Will is positive, the Judgment is negative.

'Is this statement illogical?
1.
Unity is indiscernible if no difference is between nothingness and unity.'

Logical

"2.

|------(1-0)-----|
0<- ----------->1
Nothing-------Unity

The difference between unity and nothingness is as “part, whole, equivalence, uniqueness, limit, link, influence, sensation, origin, derivative, rule, condition, intent, and fulfillment.”

Unity: non-self-contradiction. 'Nothing' and its quality 'nothingness' is in logical unity.

'3.
The difference between unity and nothingness is unity
1-0 =1 = Unity
=> Unity is as “part, whole, equivalence, uniqueness, limit, link, influence, sensation, origin, derivative, rule, condition, intent, and fulfillment.”

Is this illogical?'

The sameness or simularity of nothingness to itself is unity is-unity.

Answer 3

Oh, I don't know, I'm just so glad to see you back. Variantly, I am a invariantologist, but not invariably.

But while you are not illogical, your framing of the question posits its answer.

If there is nothingness (which I neither grant nor deny)
and there is unity (which I neither grant nor deny)

what comes between them is PARTIALNESS

which is demonstrated by the human desire to fall into nothingness (death)

or to be united with the godhead (death)

thus demonstrating that life itself is PARTIALNESS.

Your servant,

o41655

Answer 4

I don’t see that you are using logic to make any of your conclusions.

1. I believe that your statement might be true, but you haven't used logic to make that statement. Your first statement is neither logical nor illogical.
2. You are equating nothing with 0, which makes sense to me, but you are associating Unity with 1, which doesn't make sense to me, and you haven’t used logic to explain why you believe that.

There is nothing logical about the list of differences between unity and nothingness.

Answer 5

In order for something to be perceived as separate then something else must exist as well. As an example, white does not exist if all there is, is white. It simply "Is" there is nothing else. The instant something else exists (say black), then white can be defined. Now there is "white" and "not white." By having something to compare to, both entities are thereby created and defined.

Therefore if there is nothing but "unity" then unity can not be defined, because it is only in the comparison to something else that we define separateness. Unity may still exist, but how would you know without a comparison to something "not unity"?

Answer 6

Anything can be called nothingness. It's the polar opposite to what we see as existance, thus if it exists, it has some pretense of creation in our minds and to the 180 degree of such is nothingness. Similarly to how a north pole of a magnet can never be without it's polar opposite of south polarization.

Answer 7

No I'm sure it isn't illogical...it's just so damn convoluted that you need a number of university credits to get through the maze you've written out.
Have you ever heard of the KISS acronym?
Keep It Simple Sweetheart.

Answer 8

For me personally it is illogical because I never had the need and or desire to be like others; basically I never found it fulfilling.

Answer 9

Illogical. Zero is something not nothing. Nothing is bounded by something which is the reason a zero has a hole in the middle.

Answer 10

12...