The Great Assumption

Why? Why at all? Perhaps it behooves you to think I am crazy, but the simple matter that subject, action, or object can even be mentioned brings serious issues into play. Why things are at all? Such is to be assumed because that is all that we are given and ourselves also already actualized. 

Am I insane? I do not mind a response to that question. I cannot fathom how things are and so can be comprehended. Ser means "to be" in Spanish. What I want to know is what is behind "ser" or being itself. All other things depend on that reality, but why "ser" at all? We can certainly imagine a lack of being, but little is left to clue us in to question of being. What is this ultimate reality like? 

It is quite amusing to see great  battles fought, lives lived, and debates had on such minuscule of subjects when compared to this question. I am interested in the response, though I do not expect much,  I am crazy after all. 

To Truth!

-logicae

Ok?

Crazy is as crazy does. 

I think therefore I am is the best validation.

And you may or may not, only have a lifetime to think about it.

And hypotheses abound, but all start somewhere between 0 and 1.

Perhaps, and so here we are! Glad to hear from you.

To Truth!

-logicae

That's just the way it is.

Maybe it isn't for us to know. Maybe it isn't that important.

What can one do but make peace with it?

Life is weird.

It is likely beyond human epistemology to say why there is stuff rather than no stuff. I don't think picturing a lack of being is as easy as you make out however. I think what you are actually imagining in all probability is a large vacuum (a mostly empty area within physical space) which is in fact something. 

Does that make you curious? If it is not for us to know. I suppose you could say it is not important, but I cannot fathom how one could discount the very being that all things rely on. If we could know what that is, it would be beyond all human knowledge, an answer for why we are here.

To Truth!

-logicae

Interesting, I do agree it is hard to image actuality. But nothing is as nothing does. Nothing is simply that which rocks dream about. Nothing.

It could be hard if you take reality for granted, but it seems we have the unique capacity to think about things that do not exist and also the absence of things that already exist (This forum could not have been here for example).

To Truth!

-logicae

Maybe we are here to have one eye on the future and one eye on the past....Ultimately, events that might converge.....GOD principle.

Do you think that there are others, elsewhere, doing the same?

Sounds like a distinction without a difference.

What do you mean?

What do you think we are keeping an eye on? I think there are many doing the same, at least many of us. But why must we study the past and future?

A thing not being here is not nothing. Like my vacuum example. In other words you are making a distinction where there is little discernable difference. 

Nice poem you did in the Poetry Forum. There are a lot of people thinking like you.

I appreciate it brother. May you go as far as your kindness.

To Truth!

-logicae

Depends what you mean by a vacuum.  A true vacuum has nothing, but if you mean a vacuum with something else in it, then it is something indeed.

Studying the past and the future is what humans are inclined to do.....Either for a reason, or just because we are inclined to.....

The evolutionary development of organic intelligence and ongoing Alternative Intelligence, is a lot to put down to pure chance.

So I currently run with the notion of creation/GOD principle, development, decline, re-initiaton etc etc....What this would ultimately achieve, I have no idea....Ultimately it  would all seem to be pretty pointless.

Or maybe it is all the work of an ethereal, Caucasian looking, beardy guy who has floated around an infinite space, for ever, eventually got bored, and so decided to brighten things up a bit.  

All seemingly a tad illogical, as is nothing at all. 

A vacuum is not nothing. It is empty PHYSICAL SPACE. A vacuum is a thing we can observe and quantify. A not existing thing would not be like a vacuum because a vacuum is an existing thing.

Empty Physical Space? Is that something?

You seem very frank my friend. Glad to have a thinker of your caliber. How would we know if all is pointless? It it seems there are plenty of points to be made.

To Truth!

-logicae

A lack of anything could not be defined except by what it is not, why? If any such property could be ascribed to a nothing or lack of anything, it would not be nothing or a lack of anything. Such things are beyond human epistemology currently. Why are things, things? Because as far as the evidence we can demonstrate suggests, they are. Why they are seems to be an uninteresting subject, rather than what they are precisely. 

If that makes any sense.

Is it observable measurable and quantifiable? Then it is something. 

Everything exists so that my brain and ***** could bless this Earth with their presence.

Thus empty physical space is not a true vacuum. When I use the term "vacuum" I mean no-thing or actually empty space.

Thanks for your post. You make two claims. First that no property could be ascribed to nothing and second that it is unimportant. I think the first is more of a truism, as only things have properties (no things having no properties). Why do you think the question of being is unimportant?

To Truth!

-logicae

Not so much the question of being, but the question of why. As the question of why is unfalsifiable, therefore, it can not be solved one way or the other, thus, all it does is waste semantic debate.

Indeed, it is bewildering, but it questions being at its core. I think we take things (this time quite literally) for granted and that nothing challenges that. What do you suppose is the solution to the question of being? Why it is and not isn't?

It drives me crazy to imagine nonexistence. It seems to me wrong to not exist, but that indicates that being is right. Right is a truth claim and so I am left with the assumption that being is truth itself. I would like to get to know this being better, who's truth I love so dearly.

Let me know your thoughts.

To Truth!

-logicae

Why is unfalsifiable? How so?

It is beyond current human epistemological limits to say why there is stuff rather than no stuff. That does not give us license to anthropomorphize the universe which gives every indication of being nothing but a collection of naturalistic processes one following from the other in progression of cause and effect. 

As for truth being used as a synonym for existence I don't have a problem with that as long as it is not an attempt to smuggle more in with the word than can actually be demonstrated/observed to exist.