Mereological Nihilism: The World is a Nothing/Something

by Patrick Kirk through Professor Rev. Dr. James Kenneth Powell II, opensourcebuddhism.org
This absolutely fascinating piece by Patrick Kirk based on the mereological nihilism of Jeffrey Grupp reveals how the Buddhists were right: reality is but "pinpoints" of quanta blipping in and out of reality, at the smallest level, the Planck length. We find in the end that our "fake" "projected" reality is the only one we will ever know. Really fantastic job.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• physical
• science
• humanities
• computer
• religion
• philosophy
• buddhism
• atom
• quark
• quanta
• nihilism
• uncertainty
• grupp
• Rev.
• Dr.
• James
• Kenneth
• Powell
• opensourcebuddhism.org

[31Uriel]

The great philosopher Rene Descartes pointed out: Cogito, ergo sum. If I doubt that I exist, who does the doubting? It's me. Although it can only be said that I exist as thinking thing. Can quarks, leptons etc. think? No, therefore composed things exist.

[31Uriel]

The great philosopher Rene Descartes pointed out: Cogito, ergo sum. If I doubt that I exist, who does the doubting? It's me. Although it can only be said that I exist as thinking thing. Can quarks, leptons etc. think? No, therefore composed things exist.

[yogawiki]

I agree with @perfectlygonebeyond, Grupp is wearing the wrong trousers to be a "true" philosopher...

[mrsbrown333]

thanks, i now have a name for what i am feeling now.

[perfectlygonebeyond]

First, this video leaves me wondering just what it means for a particle to be an immaterial point. Secondly, in researching a bit about Grupp, I find that I can't take him seriously as a philosopher because his attitude and disposition is unbecoming of one. Third, mereological nihilism, as pingala points out, fails to answer very basic questions. One question: How can these dimensionless points add up to anything macroscopic? Or, what about the reality and nature of the space between them?

[pingala10]

Mereological Nihilism is closer to dignaga's Pramāṇa-samuccaya, but fails to address basic questions about reality and composition. It ignores dependent origination of the world and works on independent framework. In Reality Compositions are done through tight and loose coupling, Tight couplings give rise to aggregations and forms. It is these aggregations which are captured by our perception through concious and unconcious imagination.

[opensourcebuddhism]

mahayana rejection of same. you think the fundamentals of existence can be expressed in language? in any given classroom, the ultimate level of reality exists as "bosons" in the room. the "truth" projected can only be individually and communally perspectivally true. there is no way around this. or are the color-blind right to deny the exist of imperceptible "red" colors"? were they the majority, there would be no "red" in the world right?

[opensourcebuddhism]

ok pal,

you enter my world. then what is confucianism since it has no supernatural focus? or philosophical daoism? or are the chinese alone in the world in not being "religious"? your narrow definition of "religion" then means as well that marxism is "science" right? anything rejecting the supernatural is then, science? you continue in your dialogue to assert buddhism holds to sequentialist atomism and do not seem to have consulted the nagarjuna works. he is the source of the majority

[Jcolinsol]

"But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it."

-Gautama Buddha

So, he advocated the scientific method, thousands of years before the Europeans got around to it. There is nothing coincidental about it.

Science is useful, so long as you recognize that it is only a best guess.

[Arodinme6]

"I am uncertain, and in this I rest my case with Socrates...."

You sound certain about that :)

Socrates stands with the tradition of logic and truth, for he once said that "the unexamined life is not worth living", something you might come to if you ever leave the spiritual irrationality so common to bin Laden, Bush, and Buddha.