Originally posted by TravelerintheDark
To illustrate that, I turn to the well-used glass containing equal portions of water and air. Existence is the glass half-full. Nonexistence is the
glass half empty.
The glass is simultaneously half empty and half full, not only one or the other, but both.
The glass is neither half-full nor half-empty because the glass is all that matters.
What about you? What about the water and the air? Everything matters in a literal sense and in a figurative sense, physically and mentally.
The relationship of the air and water is incidental and open to interpretation. The inherent problem is that the glass only matters from the
perspective of existence and nonexistence, i.e. to the water and air.
The generic ratio of water to air inside the glass. But the air exists, AND the water exists. The glass, no matter how you look at it (from the
perspective of either water or air), is simultaneously half full and half empty.
To truly understand nothingness, neither perspective is valid and must be equally true and false. The only thing left to do then is to look at
the issue from a different perspective.
Well, if it is equally true and false then is it not validated?
It is valid to say that the glass is both half empty and half full. If the glass was filled to 1/4 then it would be valid to say that the glass is
either 1/4 full or 3/4 empty. The same would go for 1/2's.
Looking at the glass from a higher angle gives the appearance of more air. From a lower angle, it appears to hold more water. So straight on
seems to be the only truly objective perspective, but it still leaves a choice. Looking straight on from the side is the clearest way to look at it if
we want to take measurements and attempt to establish the "reality".
If the top is open we could also look straight down and make a mark on the inside of the cup where the water stands. If we truly want to make a valid
measurement of where the water is at then we can't go on perspective alone. We must accurately measure the water hands on. Objective reality isn't
just left up to perspective.
So what's the point in expressing "nothingness"?
Non locally it determines interconnection, it also determines eternity and immeasurable, it also represents the symbol 0. Loosely and locally it is
used to determine the presence of a thing from its past, supposed or originating place. For instance: "there's nothing there!" We all know there is
something everywhere, but nothing in this case is used to describe the absence of a particular item, idea or concept.
For me it is an impractical way of illustrating the idea of perceiving all perspectives without favor. Whether that is achievable or not is not
the issue to me. By virtue of being describable as something, it is possible. Nothing is only describable as nothing. Which makes it absolute.
Indeed, absolutely nothing.
Nothing, when used in differing contexts can be described as the concept of something's absence to a particular location, however if that something
still exists in its aforementioned form and is simply not in its location (misplaced, tardy, etc.), then nothing is used to describe the existence of
something that can not currently be seen where it is expected to be, as illustrated above.
It is true that nothing is absolute and that we live of an absolute existence. However, the dichotomy of nothing's eternity is rarely understood by
most Human Creatures.
Post script: I enjoy your threads and our conversations.
[edit on 20-9-2008 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]