Non-existence is Impossible; Existence is Necessary

[Michael Paul]

The very notion of non-existence is incoherent and contradictory.

If non-existence were the case, it would have to be the case. But the very concept of non-existence implies non-being. This violates the law of non-contradiction, which states that something, or rather “non-being”, cannot both be and not be.

Here’s another way to view the non-existence of non-existence:

For the sake of argument, let’s consider existence to be a contingent fact; that is, it could potentially not be the case. This would mean that non-existence is possible, under the assumption that existence is contingent.

If existence is contingent, but it in fact exists, then the possibility for existence was undeniably real. But if the possibility for existence was real, that possibility must exist. Therefore, the reality of the possibility of existence necessarily implies existence in full, because the mere possibility of existence itself is something and not nothing. Therefore, existence is necessary and not contingent, and if existence is necessary, it’s also eternal, because it must exist and cannot fail to exist.

Edited November 7, 2020 by Michael Paul

[Moksha]

Etymology of existence: "to stand out".

Existence is manifestation. Non-existence is being. The former arises arises out of the latter. Objects vs. the space in which they arise.

The sky doesn't exist. Can you point to it, or tell me when you arrive at it? It is the space that allows things to exist.

Quote

Thirty spokes share the wheel's hub; It is the center hole that makes it useful. Shape clay into a vessel; It is the space within that makes it useful. Cut doors and windows for a room; It is the holes which make it useful. Therefore profit comes from what is there; Usefulness from what is not there. (Tao Te Ching Chapter 11)

Edited November 7, 2020 by Moksha

[Michael Paul]

@Moksha Interesting perspective. Thanks for that.

The notion of “existence” that I was trying to encapsulate in the original post was “that which is”. Existence in this sense, as a category, is logically immutable in that it must exist in some form, as I tried to show.

Non-existence would be the absence of “that which is”. But it would also have to be absent of itself, meaning that it could not obtain and still considered to be true.

[Moksha]

By defining anything as "that which is", you are categorically excluding the nothingness outside of "that which is". That nothingness is "that which is not". By definition, it cannot be "that which is".

From the ultimate perspective, definition itself is nonsensical. If ultimate reality is nondualistic, you cannot separate, including separating anything from nothing.

This is the futility of trying to comprehend ultimate reality. It is impossible for the human mind. Nonduality is singularity. It is everything that exists, and every nothing that does not exist. It is reality and it is unreality. It is manifested and it is unmanifested. Don't try to understand it. Just be it  

 

[Javfly33]

Yeah, I used to have this realization when I was kid. i would try to imagine death, and it would feel like an impossible thing. Because awareness must be there to exist.

[Nahm]

Nothing really exists. 

[zeroISinfinity]

14 hours ago, Nahm said:

Nothing really exists. 

Ok my all black friend.

Well if permanence was ultimate truth then this would be the case.

Since it is not we have Reality.

[Nahm]

@zeroISinfinity

Not a nihilistic thought about nothing, this nothing existing, apparently. 

[Reciprocality]

Yes, you've got it Paul! But what remains is a conclusion, a belief.

Eternal recurrence is a derivative of your realization, what do you think about that?

[zeroISinfinity]

13 minutes ago, Nahm said:

@zeroISinfinity

Not a nihilistic thought about nothing, this nothing existing, apparently. 

Nothing is Pure Love/actually.

[bennett oppel]

17 hours ago, Michael Paul said:

The very notion of non-existence is incoherent and contradictory.

If non-existence were the case, it would have to be the case. But the very concept of non-existence implies non-being. This violates the law of non-contradiction, which states that something, or rather “non-being”, cannot both be and not be.

Here’s another way to view the non-existence of non-existence:

For the sake of argument, let’s consider existence to be a contingent fact; that is, it could potentially not be the case. This would mean that non-existence is possible, under the assumption that existence is contingent.

If existence is contingent, but it in fact exists, then the possibility for existence was undeniably real. But if the possibility for existence was real, that possibility must exist. Therefore, the reality of the possibility of existence necessarily implies existence in full, because the mere possibility of existence itself is something and not nothing. Therefore, existence is necessary and not contingent, and if existence is necessary, it’s also eternal, because it must exist and cannot fail to exist.

Non existent non existence = existence. The universe started in a state of non existence and then its non existence multiplied across itself popping itself into existence.

[zeroISinfinity]

@Nahm Not bashing you it is just who reads this do not get some nihilistic idea about Reality.Better to say actual love then nothing.Not all are Jed.

[Nahm]

@zeroISinfinity

Well yeah, but that’s if the nihilistic idea came from my comment (none of ‘your’ meaning or ideas come from anyone or anywhere). What if I’m already thinking that I’m thinking existence, but not noticing the duality of thought (such as the possibility of existence being something & not nothing)? Then ‘nothing really exists’ stands to throw a wrench in that, and inevitably I’m going to intuitively want to make sense of this. Maybe it stands to under pin necessity is a contingency, but not necessarily.

[Gesundheit]

What is existence?

[zeroISinfinity]

1 hour ago, Nahm said:

@zeroISinfinity

Well yeah, but that’s if the nihilistic idea came from my comment (none of ‘your’ meaning or ideas come from anyone or anywhere). What if I’m already thinking that I’m thinking existence, but not noticing the duality of thought (such as the possibility of existence being something & not nothing)? Then ‘nothing really exists’ stands to throw a wrench in that, and inevitably I’m going to intuitively want to make sense of this. Maybe it stands to under pin necessity is a contingency, but not necessarily.

Thanks,you are correct.❤️

[KingEnergy]

Lol