Why is there anything at all?

[Matthias]

To me the ultimate question, regardless of your religious beliefs or lack thereof.

Really, to me it's most comparable to thinking about the idea of "forever", if you think about it enough, it definitely seems kinda depressing and even leads to a sort of nihlistic feeling. I cannot comprehend it.

Why are there atoms, or space and time? Because of laws of the universe? Why would there be any laws of anything to begin with?

The God explanation does not help to me. Where did God come from? Why would God exist?

To remain sane, it seems to me, humans just have to accept their inability to comprehend if they are going to survive as a self-aware being.

But still, to me it makes no sense that there is "something" instead of "nothing". The status quo in my human comprehension would be "nothing", as "something" seems to infer some sort of cause. If there is nothing, there can never be something.

Bleah, as you can see, I confound myself!

[(s)AINT]

There are some things that we CAN NOT know. As in why is there something rather than nothing.

But it does not bother me why we are here and there is something rather than nothing. Just look at the religious and see how much it matters to them that their god created their world. Talk about arrogance.

[Matthias]

There are some things that we CAN NOT know. As in why is there something rather than nothing.

But it does not bother me why we are here and there is something rather than nothing. Just look at the religious and see how much it matters to them that their god created their world. Talk about arrogance.

I tend to think of religion as a sort of evolution. Considering our level of self-awareness and cognition, I think something like religion can keep us mentally healthy enough to survive as a species. I think that is part of the initial revulstion towards atheism. It almost seems anti-human. And really, it is relatively new as an established idea, though I'm sure atheists have always existed, but I can see why some look at it as almost regressive.

Of course, religion has its drawbacks, and they are more apparant now than ever as religion's evolutionary use in many ways is no longer needed and indeed is in some ways regressive in the situation we now find ourselves in.

With our greater understanding through science, religion's use has lessened. Just a willingness to accept the unknown seems to be all that is needed now

In that sense, I think humor is probably the most important evolutionary mental trait humanity has. Humor allows us to accept and even find joy in uncertainty.

Nihlism seems to the big danger to humanity in that since, and I think religious people often times think that atheism will lead to it, though obviously that has shown not to be the case.

[Vir Triumphalis]

There are some things that we CAN NOT know. As in why is there something rather than nothing.

But it does not bother me why we are here and there is something rather than nothing. Just look at the religious and see how much it matters to them that their god created their world. Talk about arrogance.

The ancient Greeks believed that volcanic eruptions were created by the hammer of hephaestheus. Saying that we humans CAN NOT KNOW somethings is utterly stupid and ignorant. Everyday, technologies are being created that bordered on heretic 50 years ago.

[Gordon Freynman]

Bleah, as you can see, I confound myself!

Don't worry, you certainly aren't alone there.

We simply do not have the knowledge required to answer questions like "why is there anything at all", and we quite possibly never will. Does it really matter? Not really, at least not now, but it is terribly fascinating and exciting to think about, isn't it?

[Matthias]

Don't worry, you certainly aren't alone there.

We simply do not have the knowledge required to answer questions like "why is there anything at all", and we quite possibly never will. Does it really matter? Not really, at least not now, but it is terribly fascinating and exciting to think about, isn't it?

Oh, it is, if not a little unnerving as well, but less so as I grow older it seems.

[Tuor]

To me the ultimate question, regardless of your religious beliefs or lack thereof.

Really, to me it's most comparable to thinking about the idea of "forever", if you think about it enough, it definitely seems kinda depressing and even leads to a sort of nihlistic feeling. I cannot comprehend it.

Why are there atoms, or space and time? Because of laws of the universe? Why would there be any laws of anything to begin with?

The God explanation does not help to me. Where did God come from? Why would God exist?

To remain sane, it seems to me, humans just have to accept their inability to comprehend if they are going to survive as a self-aware being.

But still, to me it makes no sense that there is "something" instead of "nothing". The status quo in my human comprehension would be "nothing", as "something" seems to infer some sort of cause. If there is nothing, there can never be something.

Bleah, as you can see, I confound myself!

42 (i.e. I don't know).

[(s)AINT]

I disagree. Religion was our first explanation of why/how the world works and why there is something rather than nothing. Religion says it KNOWS how the world was created and who created it(monotheism specifically). That is all you need to know and any further investigation into its claims is heresy.

That would be regressive and unhealthy to the human species. And I know you know that evidence is all around of what the consequences have been of centuries of religious dominated thought.

[Matthias]

I disagree. Religion was our first explanation of why/how the world works and why there is something rather than nothing. Religion says it KNOWS how the world was created and who created it(monotheism specifically). That is all you need to know and any further investigation into its claims is heresy.

That would be regressive and unhealthy to the human species. And I know you know that evidence is all around of what the consequences have been of centuries of religious dominated thought.

Oh sure, I agree that now there are quite a few drawbacks. But back in the day, it had its uses in creating order in a rather chaotic world. And some forms of religion are much less harmful than others. And religion does sometimes even encourage curiosity and investigation. After all, a belief in God does not preclude investigating how God's creation works for the benefit of all. Quite a few religious scientists attest to that.

Unsurprisingly, the more self-destructive religions did not survive.

I do believe that certain religious beliefs do more benefit than harm. Religion can be a strong motivator and tool. How that tool is used is what really matters I suppose. Many religions have been reforming themselves over the last centuries at a remarkable pace to keep up with the times and remain more beneficial than harmful to society, lest they be discarded otherwise.

[43rdFoot]

Why does there need to be a reason or purpose?

[Irishpsycho]

Well, being a religious person, I can honestly say that believing in a higher power (monotheistic God) is no handycap when trying to understand existance, because when it comes right down to it We've all got nothin'. Religion (at least for me) means that it's okay not to completely understand the universe, because I am not meant to. No matter what you believe in I think we are all in agreement that the human mind can't comprehend nonexistance, because it does itself exist.

Religion simply puts forth the theory that the universe has a purpose, and that we are a part of that purpose. Monotheistic religion adds to this that the universe is a consious entity. Religious tennants add the theory that the universe takes interest in human affairs and has an opinion on them. Tennants are essentially small human specific purposes meant to aid us in coping with the uncertainty of life. Wheather these purposes have a greater meaning is utterly irrelevant because they entertain our minds and keep us busy and happy.

Consider this, if we cannot comprehend nothingness and nonexistance, do we really have any proof that they are possible? Can we who have existed as self aware beings truly experience nonexistance and unawareness? It is my personal belief that both nothingness and nonexistance are myths created by the fragile minds of human beings as they try to understand existance and begin looking for an easy answer.

[The Dude]

Perhaps the "why" question is something that existence does not in any way concern itself with. Immanuel Kant argued that things such as space and time are not necessarily things external to us but are more akin to instruments of human reason with which we can make any sense at all of the information we receive via our senses and intellect.

The same may well be true for causality, since afterall what is causality if not an expression in space-time? The "why" question by definition asks for a reason behind causality, but if causality does not actually exist, then the question becomes pointless to ask.

That is not to say of course, that we will ever stop asking it. It may very well be inherent to our nature to want to know why, even if there's no use at all.

[Helm]

Turning the question on it's head why should there be nothing at all?

[The Dude]

Turning the question on it's head why should there be nothing at all?

Same question, same problem. There can't be an effective answer to either, so it seems wise to first examine why we ask it, and what we mean when we ask it. That's the only way to get any clarity on what's going on here.

[Juvenal]

Why are there atoms, or space and time? Because of laws of the universe? Why would there be any laws of anything to begin with?

...But still, to me it makes no sense that there is "something" instead of "nothing". The status quo in my human comprehension would be "nothing", as "something" seems to infer some sort of cause. If there is nothing, there can never be something.

But it makes all the sense in the world! I exist (self-evident), these things are necessary for my existence, therefore they must exist also! Check out The Anthropic Principle

I don't mean to be flippant here, if you feel that "nothing" seems more plausible than "something", then your reasoning must be faulty because someone - you - is actually doing the reasoning and must therefore be included in your conclusions.

The God explanation does not help to me. Where did God come from? Why would God exist?

Belief in God is a consequence of humanity looking for answers. Religious answers are essentially provided through revelation (sometimes direct, but usually at second-hand). Theologians can then apply reason and logic to extend and harmonise these answers.

Scientific answers may also be inspired by revelatory experiences, but they are constrained by having to be reproducible, testable and falsifiable. In recent history (well, the last few hundred years actually), science has overturned many accepted opinions about what is true. This has tempted many people to think that it can replace religion. But the fact is that most of the burning questions we have about existence just don't have scientific answers.

So, why would God exist? Well partly because people have said that God exists, and used that to provide explanations for things that we feel are important. But most importantly, God exists for believers because of Faith. Faith shifts belief in God from supposition to certainty by reclassifying God's existence an axiom rather than a conclusion.

[Jack04]

The state of "nothing" appears to be inherently unstable. If that is universal, it would make "anything"'s existence a statistical certainty.

[Vizsla]

Entropy?

There are many more ways in which Something can be arranged than Nothing. Nothing has only one state. Something has a vast number of possible states. Therefore the probability of Something is much higher than the probability of Nothing.

Eventually all the stars will have gone out and all the photons will be at absolute zero and everything will be so far away from everything else that in the middle there is Nothing.

So maybe every time there is Nothing you get Something.

[Helm]

The state of "nothing" appears to be inherently unstable. If that is universal, it would make "anything"'s existence a statistical certainty.

But nothing isn't a state of anything.

It's a Holy Mystery.

Scientific mystery.

[Vizsla]

But nothing isn't a state of anything.

Almost.
Nothing is a concept which describes the state in which there is an absence of things. In this case Everything.

[Helm]

Almost.
Nothing is a concept which describes the state in which there is an absence of things. In this case Everything.

As soon as you have a concept of something you are thinking of something so whatever is you're thinking about can't be nothing.