Re: Existence requires Non-Existence?

Walter Gray (
Sat, 28 Mar 1998 21:57:13 +0100 (MET)

In article <>, "Will" <> writes:
: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?




Disclaimer: My employer is not responsible for this stuff.
Please reply to: as the address given above
sometimes doesn't work.