Ask a question

Why Is There Something Rather Than Nothing

Why is there something rather than nothing?

If you haven't already, do yourself a favor and read Heidegger's book "An Introduction to Metaphysics", preferably Ralph Manheim's translation (Yale University Press) if you cannot read the original in German that is. To Heidegger the fundamental question of metaphysics (and perhaps all of philosophy) is: "Why are there essents rather than nothing"; with "essents" being "existents" or "things that are". In order words: "Why are there essents, why is there anything at all, rather than nothing?". While you are at it read Sartre's "Being and Nothingness" as well, among others. This issue is way too involved to lend itself to an adequate treatment in a Y!A limited forum. All I can tell you here is keep at it - you are on the right track; but be courageous my friend because you're gonna need all the courage that you can possibly muster if you have decided to walk the path of Being, Transcendence, Nothingness and Beyond. Good Luck!

Why is there something rather than nothing?

If the universe always existed then the next question is, where did personality come from? Why couldn't personality always exist if something always existed? If there is no personality, then there is no purpose, meaning or value... personality had to always exist....

Why there is something rather than nothing?

Because our minds can't fathom nothing.

If there is no God, Why is there something rather than nothing? why does everything exist?

If there is no God, “the big questions” remain unanswered, so how do we answer the following questions: Why is there something rather than nothing?
This question was asked by Aristotle and Leibniz alike, and Ravi Zacharias,
But it is an historic concern. Why is there conscious, intelligent life on this planet, and is there any meaning to this life? If there is meaning, what kind of meaning and how is it found? Does human history lead anywhere, or is it all in vain since death is merely the end? How do you come to understand good and evil, right and wrong without a transcendent signifier? If these concepts are merely social constructions, or human opinions, whose opinion does one trust in determining what is good or bad, right or wrong? If you are content within atheism, what circumstances would serve to make you open to other answers?

Why should there be anything rather than nothing?

this is what martin heidegger refers to as the fundamental question. why are there essents rather than nothing?

the whole of his body of work in philosophy is spent driving to resolve this question. but in the end, he finds that all we can do is acknowledge that there is a state of existence called "Being", (note the capital B) in which we participate by virtue of our own existence and which may or may not be God. he says that western thought is shaped by greek philosophy, especially the work of aristotle, which attempted to list, define and categorize the material world, which has caused every western thinker ever since to divide things from their essences as essents. it is impossible for western thinkers to unlearn this behavior. he makes some flirtation with taoism, an eastern religion which roughly translates as "the way", and hinduism, which contemplates the common existence of all things and notes it as illusory, as more useful ways of thinking about "Being", but finds them culturally inappropriate for a westerner to make reference of. one's understanding of "Being" is essentially going to be based upon one's own cultural experience. in the end, heidegger concludes that we cannot know God without understanding "Being" and that all we can really do is attempt to contemplate our own participation in beingness to acheive an individual understanding of our relationship with "Being", and perhaps then know God, if only subjectively.