Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1
Existence, and before existence there was....
    #3488483 -

Ok, even if everything is illusion, our very thoughts are proof of existence...

There may be another dimension with no relation to our universe in space or time... but there is definetly 'something'.

Comeing to terms with, and grasping the concept of how we 'humans' came about from the big bang is hard enough as it is, but what about before existence? Surely there was a time when there was absolutly nothing at all? If not, then it doesnt make sense to me how there simply just is existence, where the hell did it come from? how can something just be?

The thought that existence is just a splodge on a inifite empty 'canvas' in all directions is possibly one of the most humbling thoughts I can think of


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Existence, and before existence there was.... [Re: MovingTarget]
    #3488582 -

:smile: I find it quite enobling. :smile:


--------------------
"And we should consider every day lost on which we have not danced at least once. And we should call every truth false which was not accompanied by at least one laugh." - Friedrich Nietzsche


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Existence, and before existence there was.... [Re: MovingTarget]
    #3488667 -

Before there can be "nothing", there must be the idea of "something". Before we can comprehend "nothing", we must contemplate it in correlation with our understanding of "something." Our understanding of nothingness is necessarily identical to our understanding of the apparent material world. When encountering obstacles in understanding "nothing" and "something", "existence" and "non-existence", it is not because these concepts are mutually exclusive; it is because they are married ideas that must be understood in context of eachother before they can be properly understood at all. If our understanding of the material world is mistaken, then naturally we shall be unable to reconcile that understanding with it's opposite but complementary notion, nothingness.

Without existence, "non-existence" does not make any sense. "Nothing" does not preclude "something", nor does "something" preclude "nothing". In the same way, that existence should be appearing to us does not preclude it's most fundamental insubstantiality, nor does this basal absence preclude it's convincingly authentic appearance.

"It is a primitive form of thought that things either exist or
do not exist." -Sir Arthur Eddington.


--------------------


:poison: Dark Triangles - New Psychedelic Techno Single - Listen on Soundcloud :poison:
Gyroscope full album available SoundCloud or MySpace

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Existence, and before existence there was.... [Re: Ped]
    #3488744 -

Are you denying that things either exist or they dont?

I dont agree with that quote


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Existence, and before existence there was.... [Re: MovingTarget]
    #3488779 -

'you can't define nothingness without somethingness' - big deal

the fact that we have thought prooves that there is existance


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Existence, and before existence there was.... [Re: MovingTarget]
    #3488977 -

He is saying the ideas of 'existance' and 'non-existance' exist only in dependence of each other. Without existance there is no non-existance, and without non-existance there is no existance. In reality though, both are just words, conceptual imputations. The absolute truth transcends both ideas of existance or non-existance, it just is what it is. Reality 'exists' but not in the absolute way that the word implies.

What this means is that 'something' and 'nothing' exist together at the same time, as one thing, and one cannot come before the other. There is nothing other than what there is. You can't create non-existance if only absolute existance exists, nothing from something, and you can't create existance out of absolute non-existence, something from nothing.


--------------------
1. "After an hour I wasn't feeling anything so I decided to take another..."
2. "We were feeling pretty good so we decided to smoke a few bowls..."
3. "I had to be real quiet because my parents were asleep upstairs..."

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Existence, and before existence there was.... [Re: Divided_Sky]
    #3496535 -

When we encounter objects, they throw off an appearance that Buddha called "is-ness". The object we are looking at "is", and it's is-ness appears to be arriving to our experience from the outside. In that sense, we are convinced that the objects we encounter exist independently, as though they possess their own inherent existence. For an object to possess it's own inherent existence presents a series of philosophical problems. Firstly, where did that inherent nature come from? Where exactly is it located? Where will it go? If something exists inherently, then it must exist permanently. Since it has been proven that all things are in a constant state of flux, no object can possess a static nature. Knowing this, why do they appear so? Furthermore, why do we insist so?

When something "is", we view it simultaneously with a feeling of actuality. It is a feeling grounded in the assumption that things either exist or do not exist, that the existence of things precludes their non-existence. When we have it in our minds that existence and non-existence are two diametrically opposed characteristics of different phenomena occuring discretely from eachother, it becomes necessary that the things which appear to us seem to possess their own innate existential quality, or "is-ness".

If an object can possess it's own existence, can it possess it's own non-existence? When we address this question from the standpoint that believes existence and non-existence to be mutually exclusive attributes of things, the immediate answer is "No, of course not. An object cannot possess non-existence, because if an object possessed non-existence as a characteristc there would no object there to possess any characteristic at all."

If an object cannot possess it's own innate non-existence because non-existence as a characteristic necessarily interrupts the availabilty of an object to possess any characterstics at all, how then does an object exist in dependence upon it's own existence? Suggesting that an object continues to exists because it possesses it's own existence is not at all dissimilar to saying that a generator can operate on the energy it generates. Yet during our interaction with the material world, we approach each and every object, each and every person, even the circumstances and situations we encounter, as though they were completely closed and self-sufficient existential systems.

Now, suspending our judgement for a moment for the sake of discussion, let's try to adopt the position that believes existence and non-existence to be complementary parts of the same process. Now I ask, how does this change our view of the universe? How do things appear to us from this viewpoint?


--------------------


:poison: Dark Triangles - New Psychedelic Techno Single - Listen on Soundcloud :poison:
Gyroscope full album available SoundCloud or MySpace

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* can you prove the existence of absolute, objective morality?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )		 Anonymous 23,308 157 12/21/04 06:31 AM
by deafpanda
* it seems therefore, that God does not exist. whiterastahippie 1,914 12 11/11/11 02:01 AM
by thefloodbehind
* *cough* EXISTENCE *hack*
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 all )		 buttonion 22,719 173 03/19/04 12:03 AM
by Frog
* Do Basic Human Morals Exist
( 1 2 all )		 mrfreedom 5,523 24 05/28/02 07:55 AM
by Sclorch
* Logical Problem
( 1 2 3 all )		 Anonymous 4,445 51 01/21/04 10:26 PM
by Frog
* I have philosophical evidence for the existence of God!
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )		 Anonymous 13,397 109 02/13/04 11:28 PM
by SpecialEd
* Finally! Proof of Gods Existence!!
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )		 Mad_Buhdda_Abuser 8,271 87 03/03/10 04:27 PM
by Evolution
* Objective reality challange gribochek 1,930 8 01/31/02 09:20 PM
by Swank

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
810 topic views. 0 members, 2 guests and 14 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.023 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 16 queries.