|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Ultimate Question - Why is there something rather than nothing? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2498 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
Dr Adequate writes: Any attempt to prove a priori that there should be something rather than nothing would necessarily involve proving that a state of affairs in which nothing existed would be self-inconsistent. Which it isn't. Are you sure about this one? Isn't a "state"* something? Don't we have a problem with the idea of nothingness existing, as this would give it the state of existence? To put it another way, wouldn't nothingness involve the absence of everything? But isn't absence a state, meaning that in nothingness something is present? Therefore, not everything is absent. Have you got a headache yet?
Dr Adequate writes: My own opinion is that the question is unanswerable, and indeed can only be asked because the English language allows us to talk nonsense. The word nothing may be a nonsense term. Whenever we use it to describe a real area (there's nothing in the room; there's nothing in space) there is always actually something. If I'm right, then the answer to your question would be "necessity". Pure nothing can't be real, because reality is something. *Nothing is No thing. I just looked up "thing", and the fifth definition in the first online dictionary that came up uses your exact phrase: "state of affairs".
a fact, circumstance, or state of affairs: It is a curious thing. Thing Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com No-thing perhaps would be a curious and self-inconsistent thing, and a strange state of affairs.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8529 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
Are you sure about this one? Isn't a "state"* something? Don't we have a problem with the idea of nothingness existing, as this would give it the state of existence? For the purposes of the OP I took "something" vs "nothing" to mean the the presence vs absence of matter/energy, not "ideas".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.4 |
I rather think any notion of a universe coming into existence is an assumption of something.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2498 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
AZPaul writes: For the purposes of the OP I took "something" vs "nothing" to mean the the presence vs absence of matter/energy, not "ideas". "Nothingness" may actually just be one of our ideas. I'd be the last person to suggest that "ideas" would exist without matter and energy, and without biological creatures there to have them. Try GDR for that. But I suppose I am talking about abstracts. The difficulty seems to be that if we try to conceive pure nothingness, we come up with something. We have phrases like " there was nothing but emptiness". In that phrase, emptiness is seen as the exception to nothing; as something. If we use a phrase like "in the beginning, there was nothing", we've used a tense of the verb "to be", and turned "nothing" into something which existed, because it "was". Someone might claim "there could be such a thing as pure nothingness", but they've implied that nothingness would be a thing (not a no-thing) if it did exist. Maybe we don't have the language to cope with real "nothing" (another contradictory phrase).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8529 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
If we use a phrase like "in the beginning, there was nothing", we've used a tense of the verb "to be", and turned "nothing" into something which existed, because it "was" Your headache is contagious. Stop it! Take two Advil, have a little lie down and think "matter/energy, matter/energy, matter/energy". You'll be fine in the morning.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1525 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
"nothing exist" is a oxymoron. Is that right?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
Dr Adequate writes: That would count as something. You don't answer the question by postulating one thing which explains everything else. OK.Does consciousness count as something? Does intelligence or wisdom count as something?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ZenMonkey Member (Idle past 4532 days) Posts: 428 From: Portland, OR USA Joined: |
bluegenes writes: To put it another way, wouldn't nothingness involve the absence of everything? But isn't absence a state, meaning that in nothingness something is present? Therefore, not everything is absent. If you can imagine even an absence of absence, I think that that would come pretty close to the idea of true nothing. Your beliefs do not effect reality and evidently reality does not effect your beliefs. -Theodoric Reality has a well-known liberal bias.-Steven Colbert I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it.- John Stuart Mill
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8529 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
I rather think any notion of a universe coming into existence is an assumption of something.
I can see that but I won't admit it and I'll ask anyway. Why?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Even if you discount abstract entities as counting as "something" it is hard to say that intelligence, wisdom or consciousness existing without some concrete entity that is in some way intelligent, wise or conscious.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ZenMonkey Member (Idle past 4532 days) Posts: 428 From: Portland, OR USA Joined: |
Which of Aristotle's four causes are you asking about? If you're asking about the efficient cause, then that's a physics question, I suppose, and you can assume natural, unguided forces are sufficient. If you're asking about final cause, that's going to have to assume a creator or at least some extrinsic purpose to the universe. An atheist isn't likely to grant that as a necessary or even justifiable assumption.
Since I love examples, let's try this one. You can answer the question "Why does it rain?" by referring to the efficient cause: the precipitation cycle. But if you want to go for the final cause, you'd have to come up with something like: "Because God wants the plants to grow." At least that's the way I see it. For reference:
quote: Your beliefs do not effect reality and evidently reality does not effect your beliefs. -Theodoric Reality has a well-known liberal bias.-Steven Colbert I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it.- John Stuart Mill
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2498 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
1.61803 writes: "nothing exist" is a oxymoron. Is that right? Yes. And the O.P. question "Why is there something rather than nothing" implies that nothing could "be", giving it existence. I basically agree with Doc A. in the O.P. that we can't really sort the question out. However, it wouldn't make much of a thread if we didn't try. So, I'm trying to make the case for pure nothing being self-inconsistent.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2498 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined:
|
ZenMonkey writes: If you can imagine even an absence of absence, I think that that would come pretty close to the idea of true nothing. I can imagine an infinite regression of absences of absences of absences, but isn't that rather a lot of nothing?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
frako Member (Idle past 327 days) Posts: 2932 From: slovenija Joined: |
And that nothing is something its the absence of nothing, i say nothing is impossible "unnatural" there always has to be something even if it adds up to nothing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
PaulK writes: Even if you discount abstract entities as counting as "something" it is hard to say that intelligence, wisdom or consciousness existing without some concrete entity that is in some way intelligent, wise or conscious. How do you know that? Everybody is entitled to my opinion.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024