Dutch wrote:
>> Fred C. Dobbs wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/30/2010 1:36 PM, Dutch wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "halfawake"
yahoo.com> wrote
>>>>>>>>> Still, my point was that saying the same thing over and over again
>>>>> will not convince anyone you are right.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> People are providing logical arguments why coming into existence CANNOT
>>>> BE a benefit, it is not "better than" non-existence by any logical
>>>> rational understanding of language and concepts.
>>>>
>>>> That was the assertion, here is the argument.
>>>>
>>>> The REASON is, "better" implies two states, one of which is superior to
>>>> the other, but "non-existence" is not a state, AND furthermore, *even
>>>> if* we were to stipulate that there may be such a state as
>>>> "non-existence", we don't know anything about it, therefore we CANNOT
>>>> state that existence as we know it is better.
>>>>
>>>> If you don't understand that logic that's fine, but stop saying that
>>>> we're just repeating an assertion because we're not.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> To the contrary, he is the one who is simply repeating something, and
>>> it isn't even an assertion, really, but just a negative gut-level
>>> reaction to others' assertions. All he has said is he "disagrees"
>>> with the conclusion, without having offered any basis for his
>>> disagreement.
>>
>>
>> okay, one last try. non-existence is zero on the scale. every scale
>> logically has a zero point. while zero never actually exists, it is
>> compared with, utilized and understood as the basis for every
>> assertion of something existing and for every equation. it is a
>> useable concept, just as existence is a useable concept, since
>> existence itself does not exist. It is a general concept for things
>> which appear in experience.
>>
>> now don't say I didn't give you a logical argument or explain my
>> refutation. disagree with it as you wish, but don't say I am just
>> saying "I disagree."
>
>
> Nobody is saying that non-existence isn't a valid abstract concept. What
> we're saying is that it is you can't logically use that concept in
> certain definitive ways. One of those illegitimate uses is in the
> phrase, "Existence is better than non-existence" a phrase which has
> certain rhetorical appeal but is in fact a logical absurdity.
>
>
That my friend, is a repetition, and I already understood your view.
There's no new news here, and I still don't agree. Unless you can
demonstrate that what I've said is not plausible - not whether you agree
with it or not - you're not going to get anywhere.
Robert
P.S. Repeating your view again is not a demonstration...
- - - - - -
