• TheMadFool
    13.8k
    "Why is there something rather than nothing?" is The Fundamental Question Of Metaphysics — Martin Heidegger

    There are 2 equiprobable possibilities:

    1. Something = S

    2. Nothing = N

    P(A) = probability of A

    P(S) = 1/2 = 50%

    P(N) = 1/2 = 50%

    That P(S) = P(N) = 50% is the mathematical version of The Fundamental Question Of Metaphysics. One seems as likely as the other. So, why something rather than nothing?

    Let's zoom in a little.

    What's something? When we ask this question to ourselves, we immediately think of things, from atoms to galaxies, and that's precisely the point that needs to be taken into consideration to find the answer to the fundamental question of metaphysics - the word "something" makes us consider many things. What this implies is that something is a different animal compared to nothing - there are many kinds of something but only one kind of nothing. Make a note of this point.

    Remember we're dealing in possibilities: Nothing is as possible as something so, why not nothing?

    The universe can be conceived of as having emerged from the possibility space that has something and nothing, both being equally likely. Nothing - there's only one kind of it. Something is of many kinds and let's assume, for convenience but without affecting my argument, something consists of the following things: {A, 7} that can exist in any and all combinations possible. Mutatis mutandis this covers our universe and any other that has something

    If so,

    1. Something = A or 7 or (A,7) [3 possibilities]

    2. Nothing = N [1 possibility]

    Total possibilities: 4 = 3 + 1

    Viewed this way,

    The probability of something = P(S) = 3/4 = 75%

    The probability of nothing = P(N) = 1/4 = 25%

    P(S) > P(N)

    In other words, the probability of something is greater than the probability of nothing, and that's why there's something rather than nothing.
  • Roger
    30
    "The universe can be conceived of as having emerged from the possibility space"
    Where does the "possibility space" come from?
    Possibilities exist in minds.
  • Philosophim
    2.6k
    You might be interested in my post: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/8924/a-fun-puzzle-for-the-forums-the-probability-of-god

    You won't need the later part, just the first 6 points or so. It explores the idea of a first cause, and what that would logically entail. If it is necessarily the case that the origin of our universe was a first cause (this does not require a God) then there is an interesting idea in comparing all possible first causes with the idea of there never having been a first cause, or nothing.

    From that viewpoint, it would seem infinite to one that here would exist something, if you are looking at all possibilities as logically being just as likely to occur as another. I do not wish to derail your thread, so if you're curious, peek in there. If not, no harm, no foul.
  • Wayfarer
    22.4k
    Damn! Knew I should have placed that bet when there was Nothing.
  • Harry Hindu
    5.1k
    There are 2 equiprobable possibilities:TheMadFool
    That's an unfounded assumption. How did you come to the certain conclusion that something existing and nothing existing are equiprobable outcomes?
  • TheMadFool
    13.8k
    "The universe can be conceived of as having emerged from the possibility space"
    Where does the "possibility space" come from?
    Possibilities exist in minds.
    Roger

    P = The universe exists.

    My modal logic ain't that good but I think the following statement is true.

    1. If P then ◇P

    What this means is that for the universe to exist it should've been possible for it to exist and possibility space is simply that condition.

    :up: Will check that link (later).

    Damn! Knew I should have placed that bet when there was Nothing.Wayfarer

    :lol:

    That's an unfounded assumption. How did you come to the certain conclusion that something existing and nothing existing are equiprobable outcomes?Harry Hindu

    As I said in my OP, the question, "why is there something rather than nothing?" assumes that the probability of something P(S) = probability of nothing P(N)= 50% because if that weren't the case, we would either have the answer to the question or would be claiming knowledge we don't possess.

    1.If P(S) > P(N) then we have the answer: The explanation for why there's something rather than nothing is something is more probable.

    2. If P(S) < P(N) then we're claiming knowledge we don't possess. It would mean we know that nothing is more probable than something but we don't know that.

    The only option left is P(S) = P(N) = 50%
  • Wayfarer
    22.4k
    The universe exists.TheMadFool

    You know, I think this is incorrect. Things exist. All kinds of them - big list. But 'the universe' is the background against which the notion of 'existence' is defined. It is tautologous to say that it exists, and preposterous to say it doesn't. And that means something.
  • TheMadFool
    13.8k
    You know, I think this is incorrect. Things exist. All kinds of them - big list. But 'the universe' is the background against which the notion of 'existence' is defined. It is tautologous to say that it exists, and preposterous to say it doesn't. And that means something.Wayfarer

    What do you mean by "it is tautologous..."?
  • Wayfarer
    22.4k
    It's tautologous because any statement relies on the fact that the universe exists. It goes without saying.
  • TheMadFool
    13.8k
    It's tautologous because any statement relies on the fact that the universe exists. It goes without saying.Wayfarer

    I don't agree with you completely on this. The fundamental question of metaphysics asks, "why does the universe exist?" and implicit in that question - you could label it a complex question - is that the universe exists. To assert "the universe exists" is just acknowledging that implicit and true assertion. Yes, it's as tautology but as you said, it would be "...preposterous to say it doesn't"
  • Harry Hindu
    5.1k
    if that weren't the case, we would either have the answer to the question or would be claiming knowledge we don't possess.TheMadFool
    We do have the answer. Something exists. Therfore, this whole endeavor is unnecessary.
  • TheMadFool
    13.8k
    We do have the answer. Something exists. Therfore, this whole endeavor is unnecessary.Harry Hindu

    Buy why does something exist?
  • Harry Hindu
    5.1k
    Thats a different question that your formula doesn't address. It also seems like a useless non-sensical question. How useful do you expect the answer to be?
  • TheMadFool
    13.8k
    Thats a different question that your formula doesn't address. It also seems like a useless non-sensical question. How useful do you expect the answer to be?Harry Hindu

    There's no formula in my post. Why is it "...a useless nonsensical question"?
  • Harry Hindu
    5.1k
    It assumes nothing can exist, or that something can come from nothing, but we know that to be wrong, therefore I don't see how asking such a question is useful. Something exists. There is no why.
  • TheMadFool
    13.8k
    It assumes nothing can exist, or that something can come from nothing, but we know that to be wrongHarry Hindu

    1. Nothing can exist can be interpreted in two ways:

    1a. It's impossible for things to exist

    1b. Nothing, itself, can exist

    The fundamental question of metaphysics is about interpretation 1a. it's impossible for things to exist, it's falsity specifically which is "it's possible for things to exist". Why?

    2. How do you know that "something can come from nothing" is wrong?
  • Harry Hindu
    5.1k
    1. Nothing can exist can be interpreted in two ways:

    1a. It's impossible for things to exist

    1b. Nothing, itself, can exist
    TheMadFool
    Looks like both are saying the same thing.

    The fundamental question of metaphysics is about interpretation 1a. it's impossible for things to exist, it's falsity specifically which is "it's possible for things to exist". Why?TheMadFool
    Not sure I'm really understanding your question. The absence of one thing doesn't mean nothing. It means something else. In other words, when you imagine something not existing, you don't imagine nothing existing, you imagine something else in its place (space and air, or maybe a bachelor if you were imagining a married man).

    2. How do you know that "something can come from nothing" is wrong?TheMadFool
    Because its impossible. Its impossible to even think about how something could come from nothing, much less provide a coherent and useful explanation of how that would happen.
  • 180 Proof
    15.3k


    Equipossible =/= equiprobable.

    E.g. there are countless ways for 'something' to be and yet only one way for 'everything' to never have been (i.e. not to be).

    I know you get there through some speculative jugglery, Fool, but dispensing with this confused modal assumption ... gets there much faster.

    The fundamental question of metaphysics asks, "why does the universe exist?"TheMadFool
    What is real? seems to me more fundamental in (and to) the history of speculative thought.
  • TheMadFool
    13.8k
    E.g. there are countless ways for 'something' to be and yet only one way for 'everything' to never have been (i.e. not to be).180 Proof

    A fine observation on your part. However, you seem to have missed an important detail - that what's being asked isn't "why is there everything rather than nothing?" but "why is there something rather than nothing?" There's a difference between everything and something, right? Too, everything doesn't exist! Where are the unicorns? Where's the talking lion from Narnia? Where's the spaceship Enterprise from Star Trek? I could go on but I think you get the picture.
  • 180 Proof
    15.3k
    You misread me. I did not state or imply "Why is there everything ...?"
  • TheMadFool
    13.8k
    You misread me. I did not state or imply "Why is there everything ...?"180 Proof

    :up:
  • TheMadFool
    13.8k
    Looks like both are saying the same thing.Harry Hindu

    No, they're not saying the same thing.

    1.. Nothing can exist can be interpreted in two ways:

    1a. It's impossible for things to exist

    1b. Nothing, itself, can exist

    1a. is about the nonexistence of things and 1b. is about the existence of nothing. Entirely different issues.

    Not sure I'm really understanding your question. The absence of one thing doesn't mean nothing. It means something else. In other words, when you imagine something not existing, you don't imagine nothing existing, you imagine something else in its place (space and air, or maybe a bachelor if you were imagining a married man).Harry Hindu

    This is another aspect of this metaphysical puzzle. What is the opposite of nothing? Is it something or everything? If something exists then definitely not the case that nothing, no? If you disagree then you'd be saying that something AND nothing is possible and the burden of proof rests on your hairy Hindu shoulders I'm afraid :smile:

    If everything exists and I remove one or more but not all things, it's no longer everything but something, right? Ergo, the opposite of everything isn't nothing but something. In other words, it's possible that not the case that everything AND still not the case that nothing i.e. not everything AND not nothing is possible. That means nothing isn't the opposite of everything.

    Ergo, the opposite of nothing is something and not everything. Remember that something is defined as at least one thing and so the opposite of something isn't something else like you seem to be thinking ["The absence of one thing doesn't mean nothing. It means something else."] but nothing.

    Just think of it. Something means that there should be at least ONE thing. Anything less than ONE thing is not something and anything less than ONE is ZERO and that's nothing.

    Because its impossibleHarry Hindu

    Why is it impossible?
  • TheMadFool
    13.8k
    What's the opposite of nothing? Is it everything or something?
  • 180 Proof
    15.3k
    ↪180 Proof What's the opposite of nothing? Is it everything or something?TheMadFool
    Not-nothing.
  • Wayfarer
    22.4k
    actually, anything would do.
  • Harry Hindu
    5.1k
    What's the opposite of nothing? Is it everything or something?TheMadFool
    Everything entails something.

    1a. is about the nonexistence of things and 1b. is about the existence of nothingTheMadFool
    The latter is a contradiction. Nothing is not something that exists. One might say that existence is the opposite of nothing.
  • Harry Hindu
    5.1k
    Equipossible =/= equiprobable180 Proof
    The distinction is meaningless in regards to the question of why there is something rather than nothing. To say whether it is more or less likely that there is something rather than nothing requires you to know the likelihood of something, rather than nothing, being the case given a set of prior circumstances. Is the prior set of circumstances something or nothing? Is it something all the way down? If not, then how does something come from nothing? Is that possible or probable?
  • TheMadFool
    13.8k
    Everything entails something.Harry Hindu

    There's a difference between everything and something and this becomes clear when we realize that something doesn't entail everything.
  • Harry Hindu
    5.1k
    There's a difference between everything and something and this becomes clear when we realize that something doesn't entail everything.TheMadFool
    Everything encompasses something.

    Everything = All (some)things.
  • TheMadFool
    13.8k
    Everything encompasses something.Harry Hindu

    Yes, I get that but there's a difference between everything and something and that difference is important when we consider the relationship of these two concepts with nothing.

    Not everything isn't nothing, it's something. However not something is nothing.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.