Non-Being and Nothingness

<p>Between Descartes'<em> Meditations on First Philosophy</em> Kant's <em>Critique of Pure Reason</em> Heidegger's <em>Being and Time</em> and Sartre's <em>Being and Nothingness</em> they left us Nothing else to be desired concerning the field of ontology. The metaphysical inquiry into the fundamental nature of being and existence has been several centuries in the making with no major negations made towards I think therefore I am <em>a priori </em>concepts and Being-in-itself that didn't sound like complete nonsense. Their reasoning was sound and these forms of knowledge have been nearly universally accepted by those with the intellect and patience to endure the intricacies behind such works.</p><p><br></p><p>But then this Snavely guy emerged onto the scene and used his skills as a Master Negator to obliterate Everything to the point of Non-Being with sophistries that somehow made more sense than these philosophical giants. Couldn't thinking just be a retroactive phenomenon attributed to energy in action implying that no thought was ever had to begin with? Wouldn't the <em>removal of the senses</em> used to justify pure reason classify pure reason under the category of <em>Non-sense? </em>And if Being is in-itself wouldn't that mean that there are 2 Beings? These questions and more are answered within the confines of this relatively short absurd book primarily with the novel idea of a <em>Quantum Vacuum Bit </em>of energy in a stationary superposition being a probable source of being for Everything-in-the-world-alongside-us-in-human-reality.</p><p><br></p>