If you believe in it, then nothing becomes something full of its own meaning.

The trouble with the trilemma is that is speaks not of the vacuousness of reality, but rather the vacuousness of itself. It proves nothing on several levels. If you believe in it, then nothing becomes something full of its own meaning.

It has definable boundaries and definitions. That makes it a vacuous something that requires belief in the boundaries and conditions that create the belief.

But the belief in the boundaries and conditions itself is constructed. But of what is it constructed?

And so in a circle one goes. It’s not that there’s NECESSARILY nothing per se but rather one is continually moving FORWARD in this circle of logic incessantly and concluding:

a) There is no visible point in the center of this circle.

Doesn’t mean that’s all there is. It only speaks of its own reasoning.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


− five = 1

Leave a Reply