Home | Issue 30 | Issue 31 | Issue 32 | Issue 33 | Issue 34 | Issue 35 | Issue 36 | Issue 37 | Issue 39 | Issue 41 | Issue 42 | Issues 43 and 44 | Issue 46 | Issue 47 | Issues 48 and 49 | Issue 50 | Issue 51 | Issue 52 | Issue 53 | Issue 54 | Issue 55 | Issue 56 | Issue 57 | Issue 58 | Issue 60
Randomness, Year 2
Issues 48 and 49

The First Two of a Series on Existence: Nothing

Reality is nothing.

Or, to be more precise, reality does not exist. This is not to say that there exists a different reality. That would still imply that reality exists. There is no such thing as reality. In fact, no thing exists.

I'm well aware that this will come as a complete and utter shock to most of you. How can nothing exist? Surely, something must exist! But we only say that because according to our perception something exists. We perceive that something exists; we therefore assume that it does. But we have been living a lie. Well, actually, to state it plainly, we haven't been. That's right, we haven't been. Not so much that we haven't been living a lie. More that we haven't been living, existing--being. We haven't been. We are nothing. We will be nothing. This random writing is nothing. The fingers typing this keyboard are non-existent--so is the keyboard and the words it is sending into my non-existent computer.

Think of it this way: only being can exist, correct? Correct. Not being cannot exist. Therefore, my hair cannot have not been not long, because that implies not being. Therefore, my hair was not short. My hair can only be. My hair is long. Becoming is impossible, because what is not will never be. Change, when we think of it this way, is merely an illusion created by our flawed perceptions. So says Parmenides.

Yet is the world not ever changing? It is. According to our perceptions, the world is always changing. One cannot jump in the same river twice, for example, because the water has moved on. I am now a second older than I was a second ago--I have changed. My hair has grown over the past seven months. Change is the only constant in the cosmos. Change is reality. So says Heraclitus.

If we are to assume that both Parmenides and Heraclitus, two pre-Socratic philosophers, are correct, then it becomes evident that nothing exists, as all that exists is change, but change itself does not exist, thus resulting in nothingness.

Remember: the words you just read do not exist. Neither do you. Neither does your computer. I think I'm hungry, but since I don't exist and neither does hunger, I am not. And remember, next time you do not succeed, don't worry. It never even happened.

Issue 49: Also About Nothing

Remember: Last issue had the pretense of logic. This issue?? Well . . .

Now, I must confess that I didn't come up with this idea on my own. In fact, the whole concept of nothingness was not even brought by some sort of illogical melding of Parmenides and Heraclitus (something I will discuss next issue, I think). It was brought to me by Simeon Boyar. Simeon, until he decided to go to Russia, lived on the tenth floor, whereas I live on the ninth floor. One day, Simeon (if he existed at all) came into my room (does it exist either?). He began proclaiming that nothing exists. This troubled Erin, who was sitting at Jamie's computer playing Super Mario Brothers. I found it amusing. With the help of Charles, who does not exist either, we came up with a system--but the system itself does not exist.

Nothing exists except for time, space and ambigosity. Before there are protests over the word ambigosity, the parties involved knew that it does not exist. But that is no problem, because if reality doesn't exist, does it really matter which words we use to describe the few things that do exist? Words are merely inventions of non-existent people to express non-existent ideas in a non-existent society. Time and space exist because together they create the time-space continuum, without which there is no Star Trek. But, of course, Star Trek does not exist. There comes in the ambigosity. Why have rules governing that which does not exist? Why not? I mean, if it doesn't exist, who really cares? And, of course, no one cares because no one exists to care. As well, the ambigosity means that occasionally randomnity exists (and we know that's not a real world in "reality" either). As does vaguer. Vaguer exists occasionally because of its usage in English class by the professor and my friend's insistence that it isn't a word (despite what the Oxford Dictionary of Current English tells us). Simeon helped prove to me that, if reality and language and words existed, vaguer would be word as well. Simeon is, theoretically, a linguist. Except he doesn't exist. Anyway, in the end, we came up with this system and occasionally talk in terms of non-existence.

To fully understand the concept of space existing, I must give an example. "Right there in front of you" exists. You do not, but it does. And time exists. Therefore, an hour exists. But the best parts of time are moments, etc. And if time exists, so must Eternity. And if space exists, so must Infinity. This is all that is. It is somewhat vague at times, hence the ambigosity over the word vaguer. And as it is hard to speak in terms of non-existence, so we will randomly switch in and out of talking like that. Hence the ambigosity over the word randomnity.

You see, it is essential for we non-existent beings to have a few existent things in order to explain some stuff. But such things as ideas do not exist. Only Space, Time, and Ambigosity.

If anything existed, that would be about it for now.



Copyright 2002, Matthew Hoskin