Nothing: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
←Replaced content with '== == == ==' |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== == |
== == |
||
{{unreferenced|date=July 2007}} |
|||
{{otheruses1|"nothing" in the abstract sense}} |
|||
{{redirect|None}} |
|||
[[Image:Blank.jpg|thumb|700px|A white background is usually associated with the concept of nothing.]] |
|||
'''Nothing''' is a concept that describes the absence of anything at all. Colloquially, the concept is often used to indicate the lack of anything relevant or significant, or to describe a particularly unimpressive thing, event, or object. It is contrasted with [[Existential quantification|something]] and [[everything]]. ''Nothingness'' is used more specifically as the state of nonexistence of everything. |
|||
==Language and logic== |
|||
Grammatically, the word "nothing" is an [[indefinite pronoun]], which means that it refers to something. One might argue that "nothing" is a concept, and since concepts are things, the concept of "nothing" itself is a thing. This logical [[fallacy]] is neatly demonstrated by an old joke that contains a [[fallacy of four terms]]: if nothing is worse than the [[Devil]], and nothing is greater than [[God]], then the Devil must be greater than God: |
|||
# The Devil is greater than nothing. |
|||
# Nothing is greater than God. |
|||
# The Devil is greater than God. |
|||
Clauses can often be restated to avoid the appearance that "nothing" possesses an attribute. For example, the sentence "There is nothing in the basement" can be restated as "There is not one thing in the basement". "Nothing is missing" can be restated as "everything is present". Conversely, many fallacious conclusions follow from treating "nothing" as a noun. |
|||
Modern [[logic]] made it possible to articulate these points coherently as intended, and many philosophers hold that the word "nothing" does not function as a [[noun]], as there is no object that it refers to. There remain various opposing views, however—for example, that our understanding of the world rests essentially on noticing absences and lacks as well as presences, and that "nothing" and related words serve to indicate these. |
|||
==Philosophy== |
|||
The concept of "nothing" has been studied throughout history by [[philosopher]]s and [[theologian]]s; some{{who}} have found that careful consideration of the notion may lead to the logical fallacy of [[reification (fallacy)|reification]]. Meanwhile, many of the [[existentialist]] and [[postmodern]] philosophers and writers would argue that "nothing" is actually the lack or absence of something, rather than of anything.{{Fact|date=May 2007}} |
|||
The understanding of 'nothing' varies widely between cultures, especially between Western and Eastern cultures and philosophical traditions. For instance, [[Shunyata]] (emptiness), unlike "nothingness", is considered to be a [[Philosophy of mind|state of mind]] in some forms of [[Buddhism]] (see [[Nirvana]], [[mu (negative)|mu]], and [[Bodhi]]). Achieving 'nothing' as a state of mind in this tradition allows one to be totally focused on a thought or activity at a level of intensity that they would not be able to achieve if they were [[consciousness|consciously]] thinking. A classic example of this is an archer attempting to erase his mind and clear his thoughts in order to better focus on his shot. Existentialism and [[Martin Heidegger]] have brought these two understandings closer together.{{Fact|date=May 2007}} |
|||
In some [[Eastern philosophy|Eastern philosophies]], the concept of "nothingness" is characterized by an [[Egolessness|egoless]] state of being in which one fully realizes one's own small part in the cosmos. |
|||
The [[Kyoto school]] handles the concept of nothingness as well. |
|||
==Science== |
|||
In [[mathematics]], "nothing" does not have a technical meaning. The number [[zero]] is often used interchangeably with the term. It could also be said that a [[Set (mathematics)|set]] contains "nothing" [[if and only if]] it is the [[empty set]], in which case its [[cardinality]] (or [[Dimension|size]]) is [[0 (number)|zero]]. In other words, the word "nothing" can be an informal term for an [[empty set]]. |
|||
== == |
|||
In [[physics]], the word ''nothing'' is not used in any technical sense either. A region of space is called a [[vacuum]] if it does not contain any [[matter]], though it can contain physical [[field (physics)|fields]]. In fact, it is practically impossible to construct a region of space that contains no matter or fields, since [[gravitation|gravity]] cannot be blocked and all objects at a non-[[zero temperature]] radiate [[electromagnetic radiation|electromagnetically]]. However, even if such a region existed, it could still not be referred to as "nothing", since it has properties and a measurable existence as part of the [[Vacuum#Quantum-mechanical definition|quantum-mechanical vacuum]]. |
|||
In [[computing]], "nothing" (in [[VB.Net]]), or "[[Null (computer programming)|null]]" (in [[Java]], [[C Sharp (programming language)|C#]], and others), can be a keyword used to represent an unassigned [[Variable#Computer_programming|variable]], a [[pointer (computing)|pointer]] that does not point to any particular [[memory address]], or a [[reference (computer science)|reference]] that does not refer to a specific [[Object (computer science)|object]]. Similarly, null is used in [[SQL]] as a symbolic representation of the absence of data. This [[meta-data]] usage of null is different from the unprintable [[ASCII]] and [[unicode]] [[null character]], which has a numerical value of zero—although this is different from the ASCII character for zero ("0"). The ASCII [[Space (punctuation)|blank]] character (" ") is not the same as an empty [[String (computer science)|string]] (""), which is itself sometimes confused with the null pointer in languages such as [[C (programming language)|C]]. Most forms of [[assembly language]] have a no-operation ([[NOP]]) instruction (often with a numerical value of zero)—that is, a command to do nothing, which can prove useful for blanking out areas of problem code. |
|||
==See also== |
|||
{{col-begin}} |
|||
{{col-2}} |
|||
*[[Big Bang]] |
|||
*[[Ex nihilo]] |
|||
*[[False vacuum]] |
|||
*[[wiktionary:nada|Nada]] |
|||
*[[Negation (linguistics)]] |
|||
*[[Negative theology]] |
|||
{{col-2}} |
|||
*[[Nihilism]] |
|||
*[[No]] |
|||
*[[Nobody]] |
|||
*[[Nothing comes from nothing]] |
|||
*[[Nowhere]] |
|||
*[[Vacuous truth|Vacuous truth]] |
|||
*[[Void]] |
|||
{{col-end}} |
|||
== == |
|||
== Further reading == |
|||
*''[[Being and Nothingness]]'', [[Jean-Paul Sartre]] |
|||
*''Church Dogmatics'' III/3, pp. 389-368, [[Karl Barth]] |
|||
*[http://www.pentapublishing.com In Search of a Cyclops], Fredrick Schermer |
|||
*[http://www.nothing.com Nothing.com] |
|||
*''Signifying Nothing: The Semiotics of Zero'', [[Brian Rotman]] |
|||
*[http://www.southperth.wa.gov.au/media_releases/docs/2007/July/MR%20Speaking%20with%20Conf.pdf ''Speech - Something About nothing''] |
|||
*''The Book of Nothing '', [[John D Barrow]] |
|||
*[http://archive.salon.com/books/review/2001/01/26/cole/index.html ''The Hole in the Universe''], K.C. Kole |
|||
*[http://www.maa.org/reviews/nothing.html ''The Nothing That Is''], [[Robert Kaplan]] |
|||
*[http://www.users.cloud9.net/~cgseife/zero.html ''Zero''], [[Charles Seife]] |
|||
*''[[Creative Evolution (book)|Creative Evolution]]'', [[Henri Bergson]], Chapter IV |
|||
== References == |
|||
{{reflist}} |
|||
[[Category:Nothing| ]] |
|||
[[Category:Philosophical terminology]] |
|||
[[Category:Perception]] |
|||
[[Category:Ontology]] |
|||
[[Category:Value]] |
|||
== == |
|||
[[ar:العدم]] |
|||
[[cs:Absence]] |
|||
[[da:Intet (begreb)]] |
|||
[[de:Nichts]] |
|||
[[es:Nada]] |
|||
[[eo:Nenio]] |
|||
[[fr:Néant]] |
|||
[[it:Nulla]] |
|||
[[ja:無]] |
|||
[[la:Nihil]] |
|||
[[nl:Het Niets]] |
|||
[[no:Ingenting]] |
|||
[[pl:Niebyt]] |
|||
[[pt:Nada]] |
|||
[[ksh:Nüüß (wie jaanix)]] |
|||
[[ru:Ничто]] |
|||
[[sr:Ништа]] |
|||
[[sv:Ingenting]] |
|||
[[yi:גארנישט]] |
|||
[[zh:無]] |
|||
== == |
== == |
||