Return to Answer

The subject of the question is the concept of “Nothingness”. That’s a highly problematic term and forms the root of many pseudo problems in philosophy.

The problem arises if a language allows to substantivize the negation: “to be or not to be” is a correct statement using the negation “not”. But expressions like “Being or the Nonbeing” substantivize both verbs. And now philosophy starts and asks for properties of Nonbeing = Nothingness.

An example, which is often quoted, are certain sentences of the philosopher Martin Heidegger.

Beware of reifying arbitrary lexical categories. It is a trap of our language. Better follow Wittgenstein:

For philosophical issues arise whenever language goes on vacation. (Originally in German: Denn die philosophischen Probleme entstehen, wenn die Sprache feiert)

The subject of the question is the concept of “Nothingness”. That’s a highly problematic term and forms the root of many pseudo problems in philosophy.

The problem arises if a language allows to substantivize the negation: “to be or not to be” is a correct statement using the negation “not”. But expressions like “Being or the Nonbeing” substantivize both verbs. And now philosophy starts and asks for properties of Nonbeing = Nothingness.

An example, which is often quoted, are certain sentences of the philosopher Martin Heidegger.

Hence beware of reifying arbitrary lexical categories. That's a trap of our language. Better follow Wittgenstein:

For philosophical issues arise whenever language goes on vacation. (Originally in German: Denn die philosophischen Probleme entstehen, wenn die Sprache feiert)

The subject of the question is the concept of “Nothingness”. That’s a highly problematic term and forms the root of many pseudo problems in philosophy.

The problem arises if a language allows to substantivize the negation: “to be or not to be” is a correct statement using the negation “not”. But expressions like “Being or the Nonbeing” substantivize both verbs. And now philosophy starts and asks for properties of Nonbeing = Nothingness.

An example, which is often quoted, are certain sentences of the philosopher Martin Heidegger.

Beware of reification of arbitrary lexical categories. It is a trap of our language. Follow Wittgenstein:

For philosophical issues arise whenever language goes on vacation. (Originally in German: Denn die philosophischen Probleme entstehen, wenn die Sprache feiert)

The subject of the question is the concept of “Nothingness”. That’s a highly problematic term and forms the root of many pseudo problems in philosophy.

The problem arises if a language allows to substantivize the negation: “to be or not to be” is a correct statement using the negation “not”. But expressions like “Being or the Nonbeing” substantivize both verbs. And now philosophy starts and asks for properties of Nonbeing = Nothingness.

An example, which is often quoted, are certain sentences of the philosopher Martin Heidegger.

Beware of reifying arbitrary lexical categories. It is a trap of our language. Better follow Wittgenstein:

For philosophical issues arise whenever language goes on vacation. (Originally in German: Denn die philosophischen Probleme entstehen, wenn die Sprache feiert)

The subject of the question is the concept of “Nothingness”. That’s a highly problematic term and forms the root of many pseudo problems in philosophy.

The problem arises if a language allows to substantivize the negation: “to be or not to be” is a correct statement using the negation “not”. But expressions like “Being or the Nonbeing” substantivize both verbs. And now philosophy starts and asks for properties of Nonbeing = Nothingness.

An example, which is often quoted, are certain sentences of the philosopher Martin Heidegger.

Beware of reification of arbitrary lexical categories. It is a trap of our language.

The subject of the question is the concept of “Nothingness”. That’s a highly problematic term and forms the root of many pseudo problems in philosophy.

The problem arises if a language allows to substantivize the negation: “to be or not to be” is a correct statement using the negation “not”. But expressions like “Being or the Nonbeing” substantivize both verbs. And now philosophy starts and asks for properties of Nonbeing = Nothingness.

An example, which is often quoted, are certain sentences of the philosopher Martin Heidegger.

Beware of reification of arbitrary lexical categories. It is a trap of our language. Follow Wittgenstein:

For philosophical issues arise whenever language goes on vacation. (Originally in German: Denn die philosophischen Probleme entstehen, wenn die Sprache feiert)