Existence requires Non-Existence?

Will (willb@one.net)
Sat, 28 Mar 1998 21:01:50 +0100 (MET)


In reading about fuzzy logic, I noticed that it is still possible to have
absolute true and absolute false values. If some idea is absolutely true,
take for example "This is water," then from my understanding, the 'This'
falls into the set of things that are water with a truth value of 1.0, but
it does not fall into the set of things that are not water. In every other
instance along the continuum, however, the 'This' would fall into both sets.
Correct me if I'm wrong.

This doesn't make much sense to me. It seems more practical to include the
'This' with a 0 truth value in the set of not water things as well. This
reflects the idea that for something to exist, the idea of its opposite must
also exist even if there is no real expression of that opposite. Basically,
if something is water, there has to be a conception of something that is
absolutely not water, otherwise, it is meaningless to be just water.

At an extreme end, if all there was was water--I would say a universe of
water, but then there would be a universe--then there could be no idea of
water because there would be nothing to relate it to.

Am I off the deep end with this?