Ham, I agree with the point of Craig's questions and with Krim's answer. And that is not nihilist at all. It's realist, practical, pragmatic ... choose a better word if you like.
It's "the hole in my metaphysics". First cause - the thing that comes before the first thing you can explain. It can only ever be a theory (as you yourself keep saying). So why make some absolute fight to the death issue out of it. It can only ever be a matter of convenience. If pushed - I'm for the "always existed" answer - no beginnings, no ends idea, which makes "causation" a pretty weird concept to deal with. Which is why "Mu" is just as good an answer. It makes the point, you're asking the wrong question, and formulating the wrong kind of answer if you are looking for a fundamentally definite cause, pre-existing thing - beyond a convenient metaphor, to avoid wasting time on further debate. Allah Akhbar. God is good (enough !) said the atheist. Ian On 3/13/08, Ham Priday <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Craig asks: > > > Which is a better explanation of why there is > > something rather than nothing: > > a) something appears out of nowhere/nothing > > or > > b) something always existed? > > Krimel answers: > > How about? > > c) Mu > > This is the fallback position of the nihilist. If something can't be > explained in terms of experience, it's not worth bothering about. Without > philosophy, religion, or intuitive insight, existence is an enigma. Even > the logic that nothing can come from nothing is eschewed as meaningless. > Despite my analysis of probability as requiring an event (something > happening), Krimel sees no distinction between potentiality and probability. > He's an active participant in a philosophy forum, yet he doesn't find the > primary source of reality a compelling issue. > > [Krimel]: > > Nothing I have heard about such a thing strikes me as compelling. > > Craig, I have been working on this dilemma for half a century and consider > it the fundamental issue in philosophy. Heidegger began his 'Introduction > to Philosophy' with the question, "Why is there something rather than > nothing?" We can't escape the paradox because we are part of it, and we > can't push it aside with intellectual integrity. > > Even if "something always existed" it has a primary source. It's not > sufficient to say that energy or matter always existed. We must ask: where > does it come from? Things do not create themselves. > By the laws of mechanics, objects are changed by the energy or force imposed > on them, and there is no energy lost in the system. In nature, organisms > develop and grow according to the DNA code implanted within them. But you > have to start somewhere, and my considered opinion is that existence begins > as a negation of the source and is actualized as differentiated experience > in space/time. > > When I say "primary" I don't mean first in a series of events that can be > infinitely regressed. I mean the basic or fundamental source which imparts > the "necessity to be". Thus, we exist not by virtue of our will or choice > but by the power that makes our existence necessary. I call this power the > potentiality of Essence. All sensibility, value, cognizance, being, and > dynamic potential is derived from this uncreated source. > > So my qualified answer to your question, as well as to Krimel's 'Mu', is > (b). But one must understand that "always" is meaningless outside the realm > of finite experience. There is something because there is a source of > something. We don't experience the source because it is not us. What we > experience is the value which is our connection to the source, and because > the mode of experience is reductive (finite and incremental), we objectify > value into things and events arranged in time and space. > > Thanks for your thought-provoking question, Craig. > > Essentially yours, > Ham > > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
