It wasn't meant as a new question, milum; I was asking if I'd correctly understood your (admittedly difficult) point:

..........But the human mind cannot comprehend "nothingness" without
.........."somethingness" to provide contrast, therefore everything is a thing
..........including the absolute absence of everything. Follow...?

and whether I'd accurately restated it:

the human mind cannot comprehend the concept of "nothingness" -- Non cogito
........................................................................................therefore-- ergo
......................................................even "nothingness" is a thing -- "nothing" non sum

I suspect I got tangled in my "little latin".