NukeBan wrote: ↑May 10th, 2020, 9:23 am
evolution wrote: ↑May 10th, 2020, 5:49 amIs 'every' something overwhelmingly made of nothing?
As far as I know (not a physics major!) the answer is yes. Somethings are made of atoms, and atoms are mostly empty space.
What about quarks? Are they also mostly empty space?
NukeBan wrote: ↑May 9th, 2020, 8:07 pmWhat does the example of 'space' show exactly?
Well, for one thing, that most of reality does not fit within our "exists vs. not exists" paradigm in a neat and tidy manner.
What does 'reality' mean to you?
To me, ALL of reality fits perfectly together, in a very neat and tidy manner. In fact Everything fits within my 'exists and not exists' in a perfectly neat and tidy manner.
NukeBan wrote: ↑May 10th, 2020, 9:23 am
That is, concepts which are useful in our daily lives at human scale don't always apply very well to larger issues.
ALL concepts which are useful in my daily life at the human scale applies very well to and with ALL larger issues.
What do you see does not apply?
NukeBan wrote: ↑May 10th, 2020, 9:23 am
Obviously 'something' and 'nothing' are human concepts. But why do you say they arise from the divisive nature of thought?
By divisive I mean "to divide" and not argumentative, if that's not already clear.
That was already clearly understood.
NukeBan wrote: ↑May 10th, 2020, 9:23 am
I'm writing about the divisive nature of thought in a number of different threads, so just keep reading if you're interested.
I have read a couple, but if you cannot clarify within this thread, then you will not be able to in any other thread also.
To me, thoughts, by themselves, are NOT divisive in nature at all. Thoughts are not necessarily divisive. In fact thoughts can unify just as simply, as easily, and as quickly as divide, and separate.
So, you can write about some alleged "divisive nature of thought" anywhere for any amount of time, but if you can provide evidence and proof of this we will have to wait and see.
What evidence and/or proof to back up and support your claim that thought is divisive by nature?
NukeBan wrote: ↑May 10th, 2020, 9:23 am
Are you proposing there is some so called "large" questions that can not be answered?
Seems likely to me.
Okay. Will you provide any examples for us to look at, and decide for ourselves?
NukeBan wrote: ↑May 10th, 2020, 9:23 am
If you are, then what are some example of those questions exactly?
Keep in mind, we are a species with thousands of hydrogen bombs aimed down our throats, a fact which typically bores us. Given this reality it doesn't seem very credible that we could answer every question, or even come up with the right questions.
If you cannot, then so be it.
But, projecting your own self onto others is not the wisest thing to do.
Did you read my question where are asked you politely to provide some examples of those questions?