English does something funny with opposites. Often, when we want to express the opposite of a word, we’ll stick a prefix on it that basically says “not that.”

For instance, we have “possible,” and we have “impossible,” which is just “not possible.”

There are plenty of other examples, of course.

Probable. Improbable. It’s not probable.

Complete. Incomplete. It’s not complete.

Existent. Nonexistent. It’s the lack of existence.

Chalant. Nonchalant. You’re not chalant.

You have a thing. And then a word that’s just “not that thing.”

The thing here is, “not that thing” isn’t necessarily the opposite of the thing itself.

Impossible Is Not the Opposite of Possible

Impossible is not the opposite of possible any more than 0 is the opposite of 1. It’s just the lack of possibility, just as 0 is the lack of the value of 1.

This takes us to the example of a number line with 0 in the middle, positive numbers on the right, and negative numbers on the left.

The opposites of your positive numbers are not 0, but their negative counterparts. 0 is just the lack of any value at all, positive or negative.

On this scale, let’s suppose “possible” is 1. “Impossible” would be 0, being a simple lack of possibility.

Where the Mind Breaks

The point where this concept really gets bent is when we ask this question:

What’s -1 in this example?

What is the opposite of possible? What could possibly be less possible than impossible?

You might have heard people say “more than impossible” or “beyond impossible,” but that’s usually just hyperbole. They don’t actually mean it in any literal sense.

If “possible” is matter, then what is antimatter? What do we have to add to it to get nothing, or ”impossible”?

We don’t have a word for it. We can’t even conceptualize it outside of this ludicrous example with the number line that I’ve presented here. It may exist—or whatever the opposite of “exist” might be—but it’s not something that makes much sense to the human mind.

Possibility is Just an Abstraction

Perhaps the concept of “possible” and “impossible” was a bad example. Possibility is an abstract concept after all. Possibility doesn’t exist in the real world as we like to think of it.

A 30% chance of rain doesn’t mean that it will rain if you roll under a 3 on a ten-sided die. It just means we’ve analyzed numerous contributing factors and determined that, based on historical data, there’s a 3 in 10 chance that we’ll get rain. It’s an abstraction of the impact that external real-world factors have on the weather, and we frame that in our heads as a percentage.

But percents don’t exist in the real world. There is only the blowing of the wind and the heat of the sun and the flapping of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil. Possibility is simply the abstract frame we use to avoid thinking about all those interwoven causes and effects.

So, as an abstract concept, can possibility have an actual opposite? Does it even make sense to consider it as having such?

Does it even need to make sense to the human mind to exist at all?

Good Versus Evil

We have good and evil, and while a case could be made that evil is simply the lack of good, there is also a case to be made that evil is the actual opposite of good, with 0 being neutral. One may be neither good nor evil, and thus be the equivalent of 0, or nothing at all. We consider those concepts to be abstract, yet we can model evil as the opposite of good.

Good is matter, evil is antimatter, and nothing at all is what you get when you add them together.

This Is All Just Nonsense

Maybe we just use these prefixes (im-, non-, in-) when we’re dealing with abstract concepts. Or maybe not. After all, while “improper” may not be the opposite of “proper,” “rude” most certainly is, and rudeness is abstract. Or not. Maybe it’s the most concrete thing there is.

At any rate, this whole tirade is likely little more than just a silly diversion. Just because I’m able to frame a concept with words does not mean it’s a valid idea. Just because I can compare “possible” and “impossible” to 1 and 0 doesn’t mean there’s actually a -1 here. I may be spouting pure nonsense here.

Just because you can ask whether God can create a rock too big for himself to lift doesn’t mean you have a valid argument. It’s nonsense, even though you can frame it with words.

Perhaps the purest sign that the human beings are living chaos clothed in flesh is the fact that we can express this kind of nonsense at all.

Or not. Who can say?

I’m short on sleep, and this is what comes out. Hope you enjoyed it. If you did enjoy it, feel free to share this with friends, family, neighbors, people whose minds you want to break, etcetera. All proceeds go toward finding out what happens when you add propriety to rudeness. Really.