Quote:
Originally Posted by N0B0DY  I think that covers the "one and many" problem in a nutshell, Sally, or some might say a nut's hell.
The way I understand it, both life and death would be considered part of the "one" reality, which could be equated with zero - like 1 (life) - 1 (death) = 0. The middle point allows for the transitional carriage of the two, like mass/energy-type deal.
In that respect every part of everyday reality cancels to one or zero. |
I just don't get the death part of it, realy I think that's why we should choose one or the other because if we have both life and death, everything is a little meaningless since we might as well all be dead since we eventually will be.
All for nothing, it's no way to live.
That's why I don't see anything wrong with blowing up the world since nobody wants to put an end to death, literally. It appears to be a problem to me or are you ok with being a meaningless nothing (becoming a void, or avoided)? I'd like to think that all human life holds some value, otherwise we wouldn't have brains like the ones we have.
So which would you rather be, alive or dead?