We may differentiate the state of being or existence and that of not-being, where the last point is the opposite of the first point, so this last term means to be not existent. Now I try to figure out if not-being is not. Does it hold to say that we can't notice something that is not, so since we notice something, not-being is not?

closed as unclear what you're asking by Not_Here, christo183, Eliran, Geoffrey Thomas Nov 26 '18 at 18:43

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.


What is "not-being" ? The absence of being or something else ?

See Parmenides' Poem :

Come now, I shall tell—and convey home the tale once you have heard—/

just which ways of inquiry alone there are for understanding:/

the one, that [it] is and that [it] is not not to be,/

is the path of conviction, for it attends upon true reality,/

but the other, that [it] is not and that [it] must not be,/

this, I tell you, is a path wholly without report:/

for neither could you apprehend what is not, for it is not to be accomplished,/

nor could you indicate it. (Fr. 2)

To inquiry about "what is not" is "a path wholly without report: for neither could you apprehend what is not, [...] nor could you indicate it."

Thus, there is no knowledge, nor way of speaking, about "what is not".

  • Thank you for your answer. I edited the question in case something remained unclear. – Rico1990 Dec 7 '18 at 6:34
  • 1
    @Rico1990, nothing can't exist since then it'd be something, not nothing. – EternalPropagation Dec 7 '18 at 15:34

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.