Post by xxxxxxxxx on Apr 21, 2023 20:12:27 GMT
This can be observed when the laws of logic self-reference in certain degrees. Either the law of identity (equality) or the law of non-contradiction (non-equality) exists when the law of excluded middle is applied to them. If the law of identity is true, and law of non-contradiction is false, then A=A and A=-A (the actual is equal to the non-actual). Under these terms A equals everything. If non-contradiction is true, and the law of identity is false, then A=/=-A but A=/=A (A does not equal anything; if A were to equal B or C it could not because B or C would be the equivalent of saying, at the meta level, A=A if B or C is A). Under these terms A equals nothing.
Either there is everything or there is nothing and this 'or' nature to the argument necessitates a choice thus manifesting the question of "everything or nothing?" as fundamentally a subjective grasp of reality. This subjective nature necessitates the answer to the question as fundamentally random.
Either there is everything or there is nothing and this 'or' nature to the argument necessitates a choice thus manifesting the question of "everything or nothing?" as fundamentally a subjective grasp of reality. This subjective nature necessitates the answer to the question as fundamentally random.
