Nothingness Does Not Exist

‘—What is it, a destination?—There where it arrives.—So then everywhere that it arrives there was a destination?—Yes.—But not before?—No.—That’s convenient, since if it arrives there, it is that it was destined to arrive there. But then one can only say so after the fact?—When it has arrived, it is indeed the proof that it had to arrive, and arrive there, at its destination.—But before arriving, it is not destined, for example it neither desires nor demands any address? There is everything that arrives where it

For Descartes, this means that a substance is really distinct from anything else other than God whom Descartes credits as the creator of such an object. The ramification of such a principle leads Descartes to believe that the mind and body could exist completely separately of one another, allowing that God chose to create them in this particular way. Despite this, the possibility that the two could exist separately does not mean they actually do. This is an issue of its own entirely.

Yet if there was nothing at one time, then there was nothing that could be, and

"While we have discussed what both men see as the make up of the material world, it is equally important to take up how each man felt he could know what he knows about the universe. Mimicking a bit the structure of Parmenides? own writings, this section

This question focuses on why there is something rather than nothing. Socrates uses the theory of recollection as evidence to prove his theory of creation. This theory of creation introduces that our souls have an existence before this earthly life. Socrates believes that, “…the living have come from the dead no less than the dead from the living” (72a Phaedo). He then takes the previous statement and concludes, “…that if this was so, it was a sufficient proof that the souls of the dead must exist in some place from which they are reborn” (72a Phaedo). Socrates believes that souls are in preexistence and that each individual receives theirs shortly after birth.

For, in fact, what is man in nature? A Nothing in comparison with the Infinite, an All in comparison with the Nothing, a mean between Nothing and Everything. Since he is infinitely removed from

Objections to this argument state there is a contradiction within the argument. “Since nothing can move itself, an object can only move if its potential to move is activated by something outside of it. For example, water has the potential to freeze if the air temperature lowers enough to act upon the water and freeze it. But water can’t just turn into ice by itself. Likewise, the air that freezes water has a potential to become colder if something else acts upon it (trenthorn.com)”. Something that has potential to move can be actually moved.

It is the purpose of this essay to examine both Descartes’ Cogito argument and his skepticism towards small and universal elements, as well as the implications these arguments have on each other. First, I will summarize and explain the skepticism Descartes’ brings to bear on small and universal elements in his first meditation. Second, I will summarize and explain the Cogito argument, Descartes’ famous “I think, therefore I am” (it should be noted that this famous implication is not actually something ever said or written by Descartes, but instead, an implication taken from his argument for his own existence). Third, I will critique the line of reasoning underlying these arguments. Descartes attacks

It is a similar reference that Socrates speaks about in the Meno, specifically on the example of the Daedalus statue (Meno 98a). Having the statue tied down ensures its eternal presence. It is always there in the soul and never wrong. While not having the statue tied down conveys true belief. When the statue is there it serves as a benefit to man, it is what exists. Since you cannot be guarantee the statue will remain, the departure of the statue explains how belief will change over time. This is what will change belief to what does not exist. The meaning for the particular will change, indicating it is not eternal.

To begin, I will explain Aristotle’s conception of the first unmoved mover. He believes that there is one eternal primary mover from which all other motions are derived from, and which moves in circular motion by its own agency. This primary mover, or unmoved mover, is said to be an everlasting substance that is indivisible, as well as completely separate from all things perceptible. Aristotle also argues that this substance does not have magnitude, but instead is in a “complete state of actuality” (Met. 12.7, 1072b16).

I will now discuss Zeno’s paradox of motion. Zeno argues that motion does not exist through this argument: 1) there is an object at point A that is moving to a point B; 2) in order to reach point B, the object must pass the halfway point of points A and B; 3) we continue halving the remain distance and point B, all the way up to infinity; 4) this means that the object is taking an infinite distance to cross, and therefore, motion cannot exist, as an object cannot move an infinite

This paper will attempt to explain Descartes’ first argument for the distinction that exists between mind and body. Dualism is a necessary aspect of Descartes’ metaphysics and epistemology. This distinction is important within the larger framework of Meditations on First Philosophy (1641) because after doubting everything (body, extension, senses, etc.), Descartes comes to the conclusion that because he doubts, he must be a thinking thing and therefore exist (p.43). This means that the mind must be separate and independent from the body. One can doubt that the body exists while leaving the mind intact. To doubt that the mind exists, however, is contradictory. For if the mind does not exist, how, or with what, is that doubt being accomplished.

How do we know what we know? Ideas reside in the minds of intelligent beings, but a clear perception of where these ideas come from is often the point of debate. It is with this in mind that René Descartes set forth on the daunting task to determine where clear and distinct ideas come from. A particular passage written in Meditations on First Philosophy known as the wax passage shall be examined. Descartes' thought process shall be followed, and the central point of his argument discussed.

A: In comparison to Heraclitus theory of constant change in the universe Parmenides thought that there was no change only permanence. He believes that reality was changeless and that the

Throughout human existence, people have often contemplated about the meaning of life. Why do we exist? What purpose do we serve as human beings? Who created us? Is there a mission that humans are supposed to complete while alive? Richard Taylor sought out to answer these questions through his paper The Meaning of Life. He particularly uses the myth on Sisyphus and his life throughout the paper to help prove his point.