The contrapositive of that statement is true if and only if your original statement is true. The contrapositive is this: "Our nonexistence implies that we certainly do not exist."Willamena said:
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is Nothingness the Basic State of Existence?
- Thread starter The Sum of Awe
- Start date
Is that really the contrapositive of my statement?
Taking a closer look I think it is actually "Our own nonexistence proves nonexistence in general" The contrapositive of "If P then Q" is; "If not Q then not P".
Close. "Nonexistence" isn't something we "have." It isn't a property, a state, or a condition.
A property, state, or condition is an existent.
Unfathomable Tao
Student of the Way
I think that in terms of our 'selves' continuing after life- yes, non-existence is the necessary extension and partner of existence. However, the particles in bodies cycle endlessly in and out of multiple complex forms. There is something continuing in this, its just not a self, or sense of 'I'.
I think if one thinks about life very carefully they'd conclude that the elements of everyday life become exhausted. That is- sleeping every day, eating, drinking, working, etc. These are our every waking day merely varied, and one who sees these as exhausted and tiring will become disenchanted with existence. Death will be easy to accept then.
Now you are begging the question by asking a question which assumes that we exist.
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
That is what all observation supports.
Ha! Prove it or ignore me and prove I don't exist.
Nonexistence doesn't exist. Therefore, we exist.
The contrapositive is: "If we exist then nonexistence exists" therefore you agree that nonexistence exists and also that it doesn't, which is a contradiction. Contradictions don't exist and therefore neither does your argument.
Is that really the contrapositive of my argument?
Actually the contrapositive of your statement is: "If we don't exist then nonexistence exists." Therefore your argument doesn't exist.
Notice how your argument depends upon so many 'Not' statements. You have admitted nonexistence as a propositional state.
Rather, I've proposed a proof where none is necessary.
Using the term 'None' you again recognize the reality of nonexistence, and without it you cannot propose your so called proof. I challenge you to live your life without using the words 'No', 'None', or 'Not'. You cannot.
The burden is upon you to prove existence. We may or may not exist but cannot prove that we do.
Its doubt is not my claim, so not my burden.