The Atheistic Explanation for the Mystery of Existence

The most fundamental question of metaphysics is as follows: “Why is there something rather than nothing?”

I am proposing that there might be an atheistic explanation for this question: Albeit, the explanation might appear to be nothing more than a play of words. The reason why there is something rather than nothing is because it is impossible for “nothing” to exist by definition. (I also believe that it is impossible for nothing to exist. However, my reasoning is different. I believe it is impossible because God is a necessary being and God’s essence is existence itself.)

What sayeth you?

Note: The theist is obligated to explain why God exists. Why? Because God is something, not nothing.

It is not even possible to imagine nothing. That does not mean that what we recognize as being might not have existed before the Big Bang. It is very possible there are certain walls the human mind cannot scale. :shrug:

True but making up an improvable answer solves nothing.

You ask for a reason for existence. Since God exists, then you are asking for an explanation of God.

Since Christians cannot do so, it is disingenuous to expect others to do what you cannot.

What is the correct explanation for the existence of God?

rossum

What if the answer is improvable?

It doesn’t appear that you even bothered to read my original post.

quantum mechanics. it’s like climate change. impossible to prove, and a great reason to think yourself smarter than everyone else.

Are you related to Bahman? :smiley:

Linus2nd

We cannot imagine nothing, but that is not any kind of proof.

We cannot imagine eternity, either, yet have faith that it exists.

ICXC NIKA.

I did. If you look at the top right of my post, you will see that I am Buddhist. The concept of a “necessary being” does not appear in Buddhism. Hence, from my point of view, you do not have an explanation for the existence of God.

Essentially, I am defining the universe as “all that exists” and asking for an explanation of the cause (if there is such a thing) of the universe. Yes, any and all existent gods are included in the ATE universe.

rossum

To the atheist, it doesn’t really matter. There is something, therefore something must exist. Atheism itself is not a belief system, so cannot even address the question of “why” that something exists.

Atheism, in it purest form, is actually neutral to the existence of God. The Atheist may personally object to specific beliefs regarding God, but acknowledges that God’s existence or absence would be objectively independent of his or her belief.

I am proposing that there might be an atheistic explanation for this question: Albeit, the explanation might appear to be nothing more than a play of words. The reason why there is something rather than nothing is because it is impossible for “nothing” to exist by definition.

Empirically, we have no way of knowing if “nothing” could exist, because we observe something. The atheist simply does not know, and has no way of knowing. The atheist accepts that it could be by complete happenstance that something exists, that there is no explanation as to “why” anything exists.

(I also believe that it is impossible for nothing to exist. However, my reasoning is different. I believe it is impossible because God is a necessary being and God’s essence is existence itself.)

What sayeth you?

Note: The theist is obligated to explain why God exists. Why? Because God is something, not nothing.

The theist is in the same boat. God exists, therefore God exists. The Christian God even chose this as his name “I Am Who Am” (I am the one who exists).

There are two senses of the statement ‘Nothing exists.’ One says of something—nothing—that it exists. Another says ‘It is not the case that anything exists’.

If the atheist appeals to the first to explain why there is something rather than nothing, then he is on very thin ice, because the second is a much more plausible analysis, and nothing is not a something. It could be argued that the second is also impossible because ‘Something exists’ is a theorem in standard quantified logic, but any logician would regard that as a limitation of standard quantified logic (it assumes a non-empty domain).

If one knows that God exists necessarily, then one knows that it is not possible that nothing exists (in the second sense).

I believe it is should be “Brahman.”

We cannot make an “image” of “nothing.” But we understand what the term means in abstraction. The same holds true for “infinity.”

No.

There’s a user on the forum whose SN is Bahman and who also loves philosophical questions.

ICXC NIKA.

I know, But his SN should be “Brahman,” not “Bahman.”

You are correct that it is logically impossible for nothing to exist, since nothing is not an object. It cannot be an objective truth because nothing is the absence of objective truth entirely; in fact it is absence of truth and cannot produce any truth, and that is to say nothing can be true about nothing. Nothing cannot exist because nothing is the absence of existence.

The Problem Of Nothing

Nothing is meaningful only insofar as we are comparing the absence of things that could potentially exist in relation to things that do exist or insofar as we are comparing the metaphysically impossible to that which is metaphysically possible. The word nothing is purely a comparative concept, it is not an ontology.

1) Now; the fact that nothing cannot ontologically exist cannot in itself cause any particular thing you can imagine to exist. Out of nothing comes nothing and thus efficient causality has to be considered although something does have to exist. We cannot assume that the Universe in particular exists just because nothing cannot exist.

But what we can say is that there is a being that has the explanation of own existence within its own nature. In other words the **act of existence **is its nature; it is its nature to be the antithesis of nothing. However anything that changes, anything that is in a state of “becoming” cannot be the antithesis of nothing since that which is the antithesis of nothing does not change because it is necessary in every aspect. It does not become anything else; it does not come “into” existence because it is existence.

2) That which comes into existence is contingent upon the antithesis of nothing in order to be real because it does not have in its own nature the necessity of existence, otherwise it would necessarily exist.

3) That which is finite in dimension cannot be the antithesis of nothing since there is nowhere where nothingness can exist. Thus the antithesis of nothing permeates everything and transcends any form of finiteness.
**
The Atheist would have to show that the universe is in fact the antithesis of nothing.**

So Buddhism is just another mythology like the Greeks, Romans, and Egyptians had.

No transcendent Creator God.

God is not an instance of a genus. There is only one God. If you do not understand that, then you do not understand theism. We must postulate a necessary being in order to account for a world of contingent beings. That’s the reason why there is something rather than nothing. (If there were nothing, then there would be nothing to explain. But the fact is that there is something, and that requires an explanation.)

By the way, we say that God is necessary being. But it is probably more appropriate to say that God is being itself. Also, the idea of a necessary being does appear in Buddhism. It’s called the “Dharmakaya.”

This is not entirely true. We can experience the mystical state of pure awareness which is devoid of any content. “Samadhi” is the Sanskrit term that is employed to define this state. (In a very true sense, “you” can experience nothing.)

No, this is not true. The theist does have an explanation. In fact, I have already provided an explanation in the OP of this thread. (For more details, see the OP of my thread entitled “Why there is something rather than nothing?”)

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.