On Jun 3, 2008, at 5:50 PM, Staticboy44 wrote:
When we speak about nothing we speak about something because nothing is the idea of something. Otherwise, 'nothing' wouldn't be a noun. And if nothing 'is' and noun and can 'be' a noun, then nothing is a 'something'.
To which I replied:
Staticboy,
I agree that an Idea is something, however, it's not quantifiable unless expressed. Even if expressed, an idea generally isn't much. However, that doesn't mean that having an idea or thought about anything that exists or doesn't yet exist makes that thing (real or imagined) any more than what it already was. For example, the idea "rent check" is great, the landlord loves that idea. But the idea is essentially nothing without its extant counterpart. Are you getting this? Things with no force have no ability to bring other things into being, so having an idea about something isn't that same as creating that thing, nor does it mean that the thing that doesn't yet exist always existed. In fact, that idea probably doesn't mean anything.
As for your next statement, I can start out by agreeing that the WORD nothing is usually a noun, and there are many contexts in which the word nothing is properly used to signify a state of being, most of these cases are when nothing is used as a numerical equivalent. Examples would be, "there's nothing left!" or "I will harm nothing among your prize winning otter-skin hat collection". Again, those statements are both numerical so they do not refer to "pure nothing". However when used to refer to "pure nothing" the word nothing can be used as an identifier, but not properly as a noun.
Thanks for your linear and overly simplistic comments regarding nothing.
Xymyl (KON)
Showing posts with label non expert. Show all posts
Showing posts with label non expert. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Top level communication: Nothing is STILL never what you think or even dream "it" "is". Part II
On Jun 2, 2008, at 9:02 PM, Cameron Burns wrote:
I am curious, do you make your living with www.nothing.net? I am not saying it is a bad investment, I am just wondering as to why someone with as a good perspective on philosophical Ideas as you have would go about discussing paradox's of nothing on a website. I simply posted multiple posts to get your attention. I did not do in an egoist sort of way, and do not care what kind of negative response i may have. I find your opinions interesting as with your somewhat comic representations of the uses and contradictions in certain phrasing of the word. When I said, "Only in a dream can Nothing be experienced along with anything. As Bue-Bye said: "Ain't no place that there never was."" You're right that I could have just said nothing, but my meaning in saying that is that you cannot experience absence of perception along with Perception in the same "reality" unless you are dreaming. Some would say that that is the goal of meditation, yet all the while meditation leads to an "enlightened" state of mind, and if you have an "enlightened" state of mind then surely you have not rid your mind of all perception. When you are dreaming you are both there, yet you are also completely non present when it comes to your state of mind in a sense that you cannot logically determine what you are doing; Unless You are conscious of the fact you are dreaming, or rather "lucid dreaming". Everything IS meaningless without a revelation of that something. That is why I speak of dreams so much. Dreams are the essence of action through non-action. Dreams unlock the minds ability to express unconditionally. When I said, "Perception is reality and without there is a dream." I meant that without reality there is a dream, and by that I mean a literal dream like while you are asleep, in the accord that reality is waking life and without there is a dream. But that sentence right there is a paradox. If perception is reality then a dream can be just as much of a reality if you are perceiving it, for example, in a lucid dream. I am not obsessed with dreams as you may suggest in your e-mail, but I do want to ask you one thing. Have you ever had a dream, where you realized it was a dream, and then you tried to figure out where you are by doing things you would normally do in your waking life? That quote I wrote at the end of my last E-mail, I saw in a dream where I did just that. I found the sun, and tried to follow it, only it did not look like the sun and I could look at it directly. It led me to a large pyramid with water flowing off the sides. I even drank the water and it tasted just as real as water when you're awake. I climbed to the top and at the top was a gravestone of sort that read, "Bue-Bye: "Ain't no place that there never was."" After reading that I got kind of surprised and woke up suddenly. The next day I went to class and my history professor gave me a very old book of poems after I randomly told him about the dream. In the book he pointed out the same quote by an ancient Chinese man, that my professor had seen previously and remembered because of the curiousness of the saying. By telling you this I am merely suggesting that when we dream, If we take control of our dreams, It is quite possible that one can experience different perceptions of reality. I do not presume to understand it well at all.
To which I responded:
Share and share alike. I'll answer this letter from the bottom up and in a (hopefully) far less verbose manner than my previous response.
You asked, "Have you ever had a dream, where you realized it was a dream..." Yes, all the time...
When I was younger the natural state of my dreams was lucid and the default nature of my waking hours was as if in a dream (or at least accompanied by dreams). Being a chronic insomniac all of my life I learned at a very young age that one MUST dream. If you never sleep, you will still dream, it just happens while you're awake. Learning to cope with real-life situations - active daily life - interacting with my own dreams was a useful skill once I actually did get some sleep. I would trick out my sleepy-time dreams with colors that can't possibly exist in reality and layers of abstraction that are impossible to express with any form of communication. I would rarely change what I personally did in my dreams but I was really a god of my own universe so I would change the world around me, of course I'm not too uppity to admit that I would tend to fly, float, hover and drift a lot in these dreams, and I was almost always omniscient. I know, flying is what all the lucid dream geeks do. Sorry if I've shattered my public image through that statement.
But enough about me and my silly dreams. Let's get back to nothing important...
As for meditation, many believe (as you have mentioned) that unburdening and freeing the mind of all thoughts will bring one to a higher level of consciousness. I believe the enlightenment that is achieved through such a practice is a sort of dumbing down, more of a "lightening" of the mind rather than a "shedding of light" onto or into the mind. If you look at my blog posting from Tuesday May 29th 2007 "Q&A Your first "encounter" with nothing?", you'll see a brief account of the most such an experience can accomplish. ( http://xymyl.blogspot.com/2007/05/q-your-first-encounter-with-nothing.html )
Now that you've explained more of the background behind the story I appreciate your method of interjecting an obscure reference as though it should be common knowledge. I was already thinking, "this reference sounds like a family bedtime story, am I expected to know this?" - but I never suspected that you would be making a direct reference to one of your dreams as one might choose a phrase from a movie (as I overheard a group of young ladies in the 90's doing - "I know of this great blowfish place") as a pseudo inside joke or bonding crutch. I'm fairly certain you didn't expect me to get it, or did you? Was I supposed to say, "Oh yeah, that's a reference to that dream you had!" or write back a cryptic message that only you and I would understand to let you know that I was on your page?
By way of response to your wonderment at my choice of philosophical endeavors, I can only say that nothing means more to me than spending my time on making money or changing the world or just about anything. As for the value of my investment, I think I've done very well. With a non-stop stream - and often overwhelming floods - of traffic to nothing.net I could have sold advertising, made the tee-shirts more prominent, made nothing into more of a gimmick so people could understand "it" as it, and many other things. Yet, I've stuck to my original plan. Nothing, pure and simple (with jokes). And I'm proud to say that after 12 years and millions upon millions of visitors I have been able to consistently lose money on this educational project. Everyone involved with nothing appreciates and strives for that type of success.
And to answer your question, no. Part of the fun about nothing.net is that there is no reason for it to exist yet it does exist and primarily for the purpose of promoting a deeper understanding of what doesn't exist (and yet has a somewhat misleading name). The secondary function of the site is to combine the inherent flaws in (english) language with the natural inclination of the masses to attempt to see beyond the obvious - without establishing logical parameters from which to judge - to make the same joke over and over and over again.
I hope this information helps you understand why nothing is close to my heart.
--Xymyl (KON)
I am curious, do you make your living with www.nothing.net? I am not saying it is a bad investment, I am just wondering as to why someone with as a good perspective on philosophical Ideas as you have would go about discussing paradox's of nothing on a website. I simply posted multiple posts to get your attention. I did not do in an egoist sort of way, and do not care what kind of negative response i may have. I find your opinions interesting as with your somewhat comic representations of the uses and contradictions in certain phrasing of the word. When I said, "Only in a dream can Nothing be experienced along with anything. As Bue-Bye said: "Ain't no place that there never was."" You're right that I could have just said nothing, but my meaning in saying that is that you cannot experience absence of perception along with Perception in the same "reality" unless you are dreaming. Some would say that that is the goal of meditation, yet all the while meditation leads to an "enlightened" state of mind, and if you have an "enlightened" state of mind then surely you have not rid your mind of all perception. When you are dreaming you are both there, yet you are also completely non present when it comes to your state of mind in a sense that you cannot logically determine what you are doing; Unless You are conscious of the fact you are dreaming, or rather "lucid dreaming". Everything IS meaningless without a revelation of that something. That is why I speak of dreams so much. Dreams are the essence of action through non-action. Dreams unlock the minds ability to express unconditionally. When I said, "Perception is reality and without there is a dream." I meant that without reality there is a dream, and by that I mean a literal dream like while you are asleep, in the accord that reality is waking life and without there is a dream. But that sentence right there is a paradox. If perception is reality then a dream can be just as much of a reality if you are perceiving it, for example, in a lucid dream. I am not obsessed with dreams as you may suggest in your e-mail, but I do want to ask you one thing. Have you ever had a dream, where you realized it was a dream, and then you tried to figure out where you are by doing things you would normally do in your waking life? That quote I wrote at the end of my last E-mail, I saw in a dream where I did just that. I found the sun, and tried to follow it, only it did not look like the sun and I could look at it directly. It led me to a large pyramid with water flowing off the sides. I even drank the water and it tasted just as real as water when you're awake. I climbed to the top and at the top was a gravestone of sort that read, "Bue-Bye: "Ain't no place that there never was."" After reading that I got kind of surprised and woke up suddenly. The next day I went to class and my history professor gave me a very old book of poems after I randomly told him about the dream. In the book he pointed out the same quote by an ancient Chinese man, that my professor had seen previously and remembered because of the curiousness of the saying. By telling you this I am merely suggesting that when we dream, If we take control of our dreams, It is quite possible that one can experience different perceptions of reality. I do not presume to understand it well at all.
To which I responded:
Share and share alike. I'll answer this letter from the bottom up and in a (hopefully) far less verbose manner than my previous response.
You asked, "Have you ever had a dream, where you realized it was a dream..." Yes, all the time...
When I was younger the natural state of my dreams was lucid and the default nature of my waking hours was as if in a dream (or at least accompanied by dreams). Being a chronic insomniac all of my life I learned at a very young age that one MUST dream. If you never sleep, you will still dream, it just happens while you're awake. Learning to cope with real-life situations - active daily life - interacting with my own dreams was a useful skill once I actually did get some sleep. I would trick out my sleepy-time dreams with colors that can't possibly exist in reality and layers of abstraction that are impossible to express with any form of communication. I would rarely change what I personally did in my dreams but I was really a god of my own universe so I would change the world around me, of course I'm not too uppity to admit that I would tend to fly, float, hover and drift a lot in these dreams, and I was almost always omniscient. I know, flying is what all the lucid dream geeks do. Sorry if I've shattered my public image through that statement.
But enough about me and my silly dreams. Let's get back to nothing important...
As for meditation, many believe (as you have mentioned) that unburdening and freeing the mind of all thoughts will bring one to a higher level of consciousness. I believe the enlightenment that is achieved through such a practice is a sort of dumbing down, more of a "lightening" of the mind rather than a "shedding of light" onto or into the mind. If you look at my blog posting from Tuesday May 29th 2007 "Q&A Your first "encounter" with nothing?", you'll see a brief account of the most such an experience can accomplish. ( http://xymyl.blogspot.com/2007/05/q-your-first-encounter-with-nothing.html )
Now that you've explained more of the background behind the story I appreciate your method of interjecting an obscure reference as though it should be common knowledge. I was already thinking, "this reference sounds like a family bedtime story, am I expected to know this?" - but I never suspected that you would be making a direct reference to one of your dreams as one might choose a phrase from a movie (as I overheard a group of young ladies in the 90's doing - "I know of this great blowfish place") as a pseudo inside joke or bonding crutch. I'm fairly certain you didn't expect me to get it, or did you? Was I supposed to say, "Oh yeah, that's a reference to that dream you had!" or write back a cryptic message that only you and I would understand to let you know that I was on your page?
By way of response to your wonderment at my choice of philosophical endeavors, I can only say that nothing means more to me than spending my time on making money or changing the world or just about anything. As for the value of my investment, I think I've done very well. With a non-stop stream - and often overwhelming floods - of traffic to nothing.net I could have sold advertising, made the tee-shirts more prominent, made nothing into more of a gimmick so people could understand "it" as it, and many other things. Yet, I've stuck to my original plan. Nothing, pure and simple (with jokes). And I'm proud to say that after 12 years and millions upon millions of visitors I have been able to consistently lose money on this educational project. Everyone involved with nothing appreciates and strives for that type of success.
And to answer your question, no. Part of the fun about nothing.net is that there is no reason for it to exist yet it does exist and primarily for the purpose of promoting a deeper understanding of what doesn't exist (and yet has a somewhat misleading name). The secondary function of the site is to combine the inherent flaws in (english) language with the natural inclination of the masses to attempt to see beyond the obvious - without establishing logical parameters from which to judge - to make the same joke over and over and over again.
I hope this information helps you understand why nothing is close to my heart.
--Xymyl (KON)
Tuesday, January 1, 2008
Q&A: How many is a shirt?
On Jan 1, 2008, at 12:54 PM, Josh wrote:
the website makes this a bit unclear, if i pay 20$ for a shirt, do i got 1 of my choice color, or 2, one in each color?
-josh
To which I replied:
Josh,
Thank you for your interest in nothing and tee shirts that promote nothing. When we created this site over 12 years ago, our intention was to make everything clear so that you could see through it to nothing. Now that someone was finally confused about something on our site, we can see that we have failed. If only we could have made nothing clear in the first place so that you would know you had gone too far when you saw anything. But as they say, hindsight is good for nothing. I can understand why you may have been confused about how many shirts you get and what colors they are because we are so focused on nothing that often the details are treated as unimportant. Although we don't apologize for this, we are sorry that we made it clear where you could get answers. Can we meet you halfway on this one and make everything semi-opaque?
The answer to your exciting question is: You get a single shirt in your choice of color (black with black lettering or white with white lettering).
If you have further questions, may I suggest that you ask yourself the question first. If you agree that the question legitimately deserves to be recognized and addressed in this forum, then by all means send it to us. If you think it is silly to ask yourself questions or you find the question to be unintelligible, please do not send it to us.
Sorry if this seems harsh, but this is our standard screening process, and without meaningless rules, obeying meaningless rules would be meaningless. And don't try and tell me it is already meaningless, ask yourself if it's meaningless, and don't answer yourself with another question, follow the rules.
Xymyl (KON)
the website makes this a bit unclear, if i pay 20$ for a shirt, do i got 1 of my choice color, or 2, one in each color?
-josh
To which I replied:
Josh,
Thank you for your interest in nothing and tee shirts that promote nothing. When we created this site over 12 years ago, our intention was to make everything clear so that you could see through it to nothing. Now that someone was finally confused about something on our site, we can see that we have failed. If only we could have made nothing clear in the first place so that you would know you had gone too far when you saw anything. But as they say, hindsight is good for nothing. I can understand why you may have been confused about how many shirts you get and what colors they are because we are so focused on nothing that often the details are treated as unimportant. Although we don't apologize for this, we are sorry that we made it clear where you could get answers. Can we meet you halfway on this one and make everything semi-opaque?
The answer to your exciting question is: You get a single shirt in your choice of color (black with black lettering or white with white lettering).
If you have further questions, may I suggest that you ask yourself the question first. If you agree that the question legitimately deserves to be recognized and addressed in this forum, then by all means send it to us. If you think it is silly to ask yourself questions or you find the question to be unintelligible, please do not send it to us.
Sorry if this seems harsh, but this is our standard screening process, and without meaningless rules, obeying meaningless rules would be meaningless. And don't try and tell me it is already meaningless, ask yourself if it's meaningless, and don't answer yourself with another question, follow the rules.
Xymyl (KON)
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Fanmail: Hypocrisy expert?
On May 24, 2007, at 4:23 PM, Aryeh Lewis wrote:
I've been reading your blog for quite some time now, ever since you called me a maniac for laughing manically (naturally... because that kind of caused me to laugh manically once again).
Anyways, I just would like to let you know that I have, as of today, come to the final conclusion that your entire company ought to be sued for the biggest load of hypocrisy I've ever seen!!!
I mean... you're not actually an expert in nothing! You're an expert in making people laugh hysterically, and double antangeras, and heck! You could even run for president with your languistic skills! You're not a nothing expert at ALL! You're in fact, an expert on so many somethings that I must say... you really deserve to be put in prison for stealing all that money from all those fools who believed you to actually know nothing!
That said, I think I'ld like to order nothing and a book about "it." :)
To which I replied:
Thank you for your kind words and your insults.
Yes, it would appear that I am no expert on nothing because it often appears that I do indeed know everything. I want to point out that I do not know everything. I have a good grasp of many general concepts and I am awesome. But this doesn't make me an expert on everything, just awesome, that's all.
Just because I happen to know something and be awesome doesn't preclude my ability to know nothing. In fact, nothing is actually enhanced by my knowledge and awesomeness, because how could "it" be?
I hope that this clears up the confusion you had regarding my non-expert status. But I hope that the restoration of my credibility in your eyes does not dissuade you from buying nothing from me.
Thanks again.
--Xymyl (KON)
I've been reading your blog for quite some time now, ever since you called me a maniac for laughing manically (naturally... because that kind of caused me to laugh manically once again).
Anyways, I just would like to let you know that I have, as of today, come to the final conclusion that your entire company ought to be sued for the biggest load of hypocrisy I've ever seen!!!
I mean... you're not actually an expert in nothing! You're an expert in making people laugh hysterically, and double antangeras, and heck! You could even run for president with your languistic skills! You're not a nothing expert at ALL! You're in fact, an expert on so many somethings that I must say... you really deserve to be put in prison for stealing all that money from all those fools who believed you to actually know nothing!
That said, I think I'ld like to order nothing and a book about "it." :)
To which I replied:
Thank you for your kind words and your insults.
Yes, it would appear that I am no expert on nothing because it often appears that I do indeed know everything. I want to point out that I do not know everything. I have a good grasp of many general concepts and I am awesome. But this doesn't make me an expert on everything, just awesome, that's all.
Just because I happen to know something and be awesome doesn't preclude my ability to know nothing. In fact, nothing is actually enhanced by my knowledge and awesomeness, because how could "it" be?
I hope that this clears up the confusion you had regarding my non-expert status. But I hope that the restoration of my credibility in your eyes does not dissuade you from buying nothing from me.
Thanks again.
--Xymyl (KON)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)