existence is created out of non-existence

Question:
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130323173639AAOY3LZ

Why existence is created out of non-existence?

Additional Details

This question extends to:
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind…

@Special EPhex,
If your referenced 'science' creates so called scientific concepts in mind like 'Laws of Conservation', 'Thermodynamics', 'energy', 'matter', 'gravity', etc as definition, how can that 'science' accept, 'something cannot come from nothing'? It's hypocrisy.

@eoin,
Consider dimension-A is exclusive to dimension-B.
Then, dimension-A cannot exist within dimension-B and dimension-B cannot exist within dimension-A.
Therefore, how can non-existence (cannot exist) be existence?

@Don H,
If 'con+sciousness' is created and exist as a concept to explain 'togetherness of something', it should exist out of non-existence (creator concept).

@glenn123,
The defined 'non-existence' exists as a creation.
But, 'non-existence' cannot be logically relative to 'existence', because non-existence cannot exist..

@nameless,
In your comment you stated: Not anything, ever, is 'created'!
Did you create that statement out of nothing?
(dig deep through reference sources to find that the base is baseless). That's why, existence is created out of non-existence.

@adagio58,
What does not exist can be created to exist by challenging Bashar's definition.
For example: television did not exist, but created to exist.

@A P,
if you consider existence doesn't exist, then how can sensations be part of existence?

You cannot use logic with non-existence.

For example;
If 0 (zero) is infinitesimal existence, then 5+0 = 5
If 0 is non-existence, then 5+0=0

Whatever existence you throw into non-existence cannot exist.
Free from existence (nibbana) cannot be referenced by worldly existence!.

Answer:

believers imagine concepts like God or Allah

Question:
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130323160656AARKP4U

How do believers imagine concepts like God or Allah?

Can there be 'mental creations' other than 'abstract' and 'concrete' concepts, because objective-subjective thinking for God or Allah, heaven, unicorn, etc may loose information?

Additional Details

@The Voice of Reason,
Do you conceive 'consciousness' as a subject of creator, because the concept of 'consciousness' is a creation of mind? mind creates mind

@Amar Saleem,
In your comment, you stated "only way you can truly understand god ".
Why do YOU create mental limitations (bondage) to think under a single pyramid creation? (slavery attitude towards a master concept)
Free from any existence cannot have such limitations.

Let me rephrase the main question:
Is there possibility to think/conceptualize away from 'master-slave' and 'peer-to-peer' relationships, if observer and observed are not separate?

Answer:

abstract conception is disjoint to concrete conception in western sciences

Question:
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130323044030AAEYQUC

Why abstract conception is disjoint (වියුක්ත) to concrete conception in western sciences?

For example:
You can accurately imagine a particular man you met as concrete conception, but you cannot accurately imagine a category 'man' as abstract conception.

instance of fictional man class ! = (not equal to) living breathing man with flesh and blood

In western medicine, a doctor prescribes medicine to a category/blueprint 'man', and not to the man who sits in front of him. This disjoint gap looses valuable information (incomplete thinking).
Therefore, western medical science manages the problem as solution. (not complete cure)

In contrast, the native Asian thinking does not consider the said disjoint 'abstract' concepts. (complete thinking without gaps). Medicine is 100% customized.
Therefore, Asian traditional medicine uproots the problem as the solution. (complete cure)

How do western sciences justify the highlighted error in abstract (incomplete) thinking?

Additional Details

@Curtis Edward Clark.com,
Both abstract and concrete conceptions exist (real imaginary) as creations of mind.
Subjective-objective view of 'abstract man' as 'any thing' is defined withing the context of 'creator God' pyramid. This 'fictional man' (personification) is then assumed as the sensory perceived man.
Can you see the gap in that assumption? Abstract Man do not exactly fit the sensory perceived concrete man. This gap looses valuable information, resulting 'incomplete thinking' and wrong decision making. Can your physical body be accurately described, even by referring to your own shadow?
In Asian thinking, even the observer and observed are one (complete thinking). Solution and problem are not separate.

Answer:

Buddhism guide Quantum physics

Question:
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130321234456AAIshlT

Can Buddhism guide Quantum physics and prove to correct the fundamental error in Western Thinking?

Refer to:

1. Why A=not A if A=A as per Asian Logic? (Intro to Chathuskotika logic associated with Buddhism)
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind…

2. Why conventional logic always ignore the existence of weak logical states? ('thought-object' analysis)
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind…

3. Why does western thinking fundamentally fail to observe the living existence?
(cyclic inter-dependency of two 'thought-objects')
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind…

Additional Details

@Blaise Rascal,
For example, the term 'mother' in western thinking is not similar to 'mother=amma' in Asian thinking. It is a totally different concept. In Asia, mother calls to her baby as 'amma' for love. It is not possible to distinct cultures and their fundamental thinking sources with a closed mind. The way to see as it is, is to intelligently remove the colored glasses.

Get an introduction of the main root sources of 'western thinking'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_lo…

I can see west imported the copies of it, not the original.

Why do you think, 'divide by zero' is an error for western thinking, against the advice of sources of mathematical zero?

Western thinking is built on confusion and CANNOT see as it is.
Simply, western thinking cannot grasp Nibbana (free from existence). I researched it.

Answer:

western thinking fundamentally fail to observe the living existence

Question:
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130321232537AASbf92

Why does western thinking fundamentally fail to observe the living existence?

This question extends from:
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind…

Lets consider the motion of a quantum particle, subjected to its own internal forces.

Two 'thought-objects' created and relevant to this particle are it's position X and it's momentum P.

Given that there are no external forces acting on the particle, one could imagine that the two 'thought objects' X and P are conditioned by each other (inter-dependent) by a cyclic relationship.

(I suggest you to draw a truth table to picture it)

In such a case, with conventional Aristotelian logic (ignorance of 'weak states'), X and P can cease to exist in observation, leading to the familiar of the 'uncertainty principal'.

Subjective-Objective view is the basis of western thinking looses information in decision making. It should be corrected as 'observer and observable are the same one'.

Like or not, Quantum physics is following Buddhism, but it can never experiment Nibbana (free from existence).

Additional Details

@MTR 2.0,
It is not fair to say 'Buddhism does not have formal logic in it' from a western view, because Buddhist logical (hetu-pratya) way of thinking is complete, compared to incomplete western thinking. This is why Buddhism is all about non-violent and targets at ultimate achievement, Nibbana (free from existence).
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind…
Why do you think, wise people all around the world make attempts to study Buddhism (even with no respect to religious aspects)?

@Not sure,
[Nucleus] is an open thinker.

@Jared,
The answer to your concern is addressed in the question description. Use your wisdom to find it.

@Quantum Observer,
Always, separate the valuable 'core knowledge' behind any religion from their 'spell-binding religious aspects'.

Answer:

conventional logic always ignore the existence of weak logical states

Question:
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130321225341AALwjcV

Why conventional logic always ignore the existence of weak logical states?

This question extends:
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind…

For example, consider the existence of a 'thought-object'

Thought object is a piece of knowledge constructed by mind, with or without the aid of sensory organs.

Let Like = True, Dislike = False.

Possible strong logical states are:
1. (Like and Not-Dislike = Like) or 2. (Dislike and Not-Like = Dislike)

Possible weak logical states are:
3. (Like and Dislike) or 4. (Not-Like and Not-Dislike)

Conventional world is clear with 'strong states' and accept them.
But, 'weak states' are confusing/fuzzy to western thinking and rejects them.

Sometimes, weak states are condemned/ misinterpreted as 'signaling to left and turning to right like women drivers'.

Unfortunately, ignorance of 'weak states' in conventional logic misses important information in decisions making.

'Uncertainty principle' also has suggested the same.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/innovat…

Additional Details

This question extends to inter-dependency of two 'thought-objects'
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind…

@MTR 2.0,
weak states 3 and 4 are not equal and are in different directions as thought (intention).
Like half full is positive thinking and half empty is negative thinking, though the glass has same water level.

@Robert J,
This question points at a fundamental issue of complete vs incomplete thinking, than a simple argument of definitions. Your comment demonstrates subjective-objective concern in western thinking, with ad-hog collection of knowledge, failing to integrate and loose information. Such a non-stable education breads partial and greedy and self-centered products. See the non-violence fundamental Buddhist thinking in contrast to U.S. foreign policy value system and the destruction to the nature.

I think human with advanced minds should try to think beyond the low standards and correct their fundamental errors in thinking by studying the sources.

@Robert J,
This question points at a fundamental issue of complete vs incomplete thinking, than a simple argument of definitions. Your comment demonstrates subjective-objective concern in western thinking, with ad-hog collection of knowledge, failing to integrate and loose information. Such a non-stable education breads partial and greedy and self-centered products. See the non-violence fundamental Buddhist thinking in contrast to U.S. foreign policy value system and the destruction to the nature.

I think human with advanced minds should try to think beyond the low standards and correct their fundamental errors in thinking by studying the sources.

Thanks guys, I'm getting beautiful comments here.

@mitten,
I agree that "western thought" should not be narrowed to geography.
I refer it's sources to the holistic creator God concept as objectivity. From that objective creator, man got restricted as a subject. Irrespective of religious believes, western thinker is sourced to be dependent. It is a strong self-centered belief, full of greed, hatred and ignorance.

In contrast Buddhist thinking is open, independent and creative and does not attach to it, because the creation is non-existing/fictional. Non-hatred, non-greed and non-ignorance are the reasons behind Buddhist thinking to be non-violent and non-destructive to nature. Asian culture is built on Buddhism for thousands of years, and western invasions with missionary education may have destroyed the good cultural thinking.

@mitten,
I too like Graham Priest's work.

Answer:

Question:
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130321030858AAcxPRx

Why A=not A if A=A as per Asian Logic?

if "A is B" and "B is C", then "A is C" is popular logic. Aristotle used it.

Now:

suppose, if A = true then B=true.
then, if A = true, can B=false?
also, if A=false, can B=true?
and, if A=false, can B=false?


It is Chathuskotika logic associated with Buddhism.
Asian culture inherits this knowledge for thousands of years.
I always see that such knowledge is very hard for western thinking to grasp (without skeptics).

Double-slit experiment in Quantum physics also observed that a particle can be in two places at the same time.

Additional Details

@Seyfert,
Subjective-Objective view is the basis of western thinking and is a fundamental error in observation. They always miss important information and make wrong decisions to destroy the environment like a dog biting it's own tail.
The western thinking should be corrected as 'observer and observable are the same one'.
Uncertainty principle conforms it.

@Speed,
Please refer to:
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind…

@Fake Genius,
Buddhism demonstrates the creativity of no-mind by using no-mind.
No-mind as mind can value it's creation.

Answer: