philofinal-something - Meghan Deere Grindeland December 7...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Meghan Deere Grindeland December 7, 2008 Phil 1000 Why is There Something Rather Than Nothing? Suppose you come home one night to find something in your house, say, a chair that you know you did not put there. Then you come to find out that your parents bought it from a chair maker and dropped if off for you earlier. Sure, the existence of the chair being in your house has been explained to you, but you may still feel dissatisfied because this explanation takes a lot for granted. It was not complete; it does not explain your parent’s desire to give you the chair, or the chair maker’s ability to construct the chair. Essentially, it doesn’t even explain the existence of your parents, the chair maker, or the chair. A deeper explanation would explain these things, but even then things could be taken for granted. Typically, any explanation to any question uses one thing to explain another without fully explaining any of it. This question asks “why there is anything at all?” Any answer to this question that takes something from something else, which is more than likely, would be immediately denounced. One must first consider the basis of the explanation before you could move on to the entire explanation. Why does that basis exist in the first place? Let’s first consider that we can see that there is something rather than nothing, by seeing that there has to be something. But what if we can see also that singular things and beings have to exist? Called necessary beings, these things exist in all possible situations. Breaking it down to see why individual necessary beings exist, we can understand why there is actually something, which in the end seems completely
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
inevitable. This approach is called necessitarianism. What if each basis to establish the existence of something is in itself a necessary being as well? Therefore, we would not have to stress the fact that we are basing the existence of things on other things. If everything is a necessary being, than we have concluded that they are inevitable and we are left with no reason to think about whether or not they actually exist. However, this way of thinking is not completely certain in reality. We are forgetting about the possibility of an absolute empty reality. This reality is one with no material objects, space or time. Literally, nothing; empty in every way. But really, the only impossibility about this empty reality is that is lacks necessary beings and other objects in it. But even then, it would not be completely impossible because temporary emptiness is plausible. With this thinking, where is the line drawn for how much space can be empty and for how long? So why can’t an entire space be empty, in reality? Really then, what is impossible about this absolute empty reality?
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 08/10/2011 for the course PHIL 1000 taught by Professor Farnham during the Fall '08 term at UGA.

Page1 / 9

philofinal-something - Meghan Deere Grindeland December 7...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online