Paul, you should make a good physicist. Most of what you say in #55502 is absolutely right but (in this context) completely useless. It does a few things, but does not address the question of how something that does not exist can be said to “pass”, or do anything else.
What your logic does say is quite interesting.
(t) is a letter but it does not exist.
(i) is a letter but it does not exist.
(m) is a letter but it does not exist.
(e) is a letter but it does not exist.
Letters do not exist
none of the words in the above sentence exist
Words do not exist, presumably because they are composed of letters that do not exist.
Therefore it doesn’t exist.
If things designated by words do not exist, what does exist?
Let’s think about that.
That’s it!!! I’m thinking, therefore I exist, but my existence must be wordless.
Everything else is described/defined by words, therefore it does not exist.
Have you hit on the best argument yet for solipsism?
