with his exsplinatoin of nothing ness he is basicly making the argument that nothingness dose not exist as in the concept is a false one.

I don't get why he cannot just say that , that he believes nothing is actually something.


I would agree that space is important and that cultraly people forget the relivence of space and its function. but I don't see how that proves or disproves the exsistance of "nothingness" existing or not. or even how it helps understand what nothingness is.

I would be inclined to say that nothingness dose not in fact exists and in fact everything is something. and the route of us believing in nothingness is due to the way humans perceive time and squentulize everything. If you remove time / perceptoin of time then everything can exist for ever and nothingness dose not have to exists.

of course nothingness could exist I don't know much on the subject , its the type of thing that's a semantic mine failed and this guys use of language is reckless.

But, westy, by its definition, nothingness really does not exist.

Oahmmmmmm. Oahmmmmmmmm.....

Moving this video to EndAll's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.