Keith Ward - Why Is There Anything At All?

[@jamesstaggs4160]

This is the question that's kept me awake at night for years now. One day as I was just contemplating existence as I'm want to do, it struck me how strange it is that anything exists. You'd think the default setting would be pure nothingness, but it isn't. It seems like such a simple thing but when viewed from certain angles it will tie your brain in knots.

[@maazanis763]

To think that default setting would be pure nothingness is itself impossible. I can't comprehend the idea how can something that wasnt there before came out of nothing. My mind tells me that something is out there, something unimaginable did all this, the third reality. This is the point where we'll have to surrender to our limitations.

[@lemongavine]

@@maazanis763 We're not supposed to be able to understand. You could go insane trying to make yourself understand. So, realizing that it's impossible is comforting. Ignorance is bliss.

[@woodriver5011]

@@lemongavine Not at all .... Who ever says Ignorance is a bliss They just want to ignore them selfs from the truth...!!

[@quantumdecoherence1289]

The most profound series on KZbin.

[@Jonnygurudesigns]

A correct statement.. I'm surprised my own subjective perspective is left alone with in these comments.. As profound as these conversations are, there's very little exposure.. Acctually I have very little to add.. But I can ask questions, so acctually there's a profound value in that. Aristotle was wrong.. As are every person that came after him until present day.. That's real. That's a fact..

[@gg-cm5cr]

nothing does not exist so u cant compare nothing and something...space is infinitive does not have bigining ... very dumb series i could make like 1000 % smarter even im very bad in being smart

[@judebachelet7822]

@@gg-cm5cr I'm very late but that's not what the argument is about. Nothing is an impossible state, you can compare something and nothing and say that either is possible, but since something exists, nothing is impossible. The question they are asking is why is existence the way it is? It could conceivably be an infinite number of possibilities yet it is this one. This is regardless of whether space is infinite and does not have a beginning, because I could simply ask why space exists?

[@existncdotcom5277]

“I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don’t know the answer.”

[@sngscratcher5231]

Yeah, like anybody knows the answer to that! LOL.

[@dnavas7719]

"if its good that it exist and has value" .. now define "good" and "value" in the context of nothingness (i.e. before the universe is created)

[@jerome8670]

Before nothing there was ‘more’ nothing 😄 inturn it was the birth place of everything ….. go figure 😩

[@nicolascalandruccio]

I would say: there is no "good" and "value" definition while a definition is not nothing

[@accountability84]

I think of it as dimensional. In Existence (Good=1,Value=1) In Nothingness (Good=-1,Value=-1) The Goodness and Value are had in Existence.

[@ManiBalajiC]

If you see , universe is just an balance. Everything you see has counter or opposite one. If something is existing there should nothing which existed or will exist after the universe is dead. Balance is everything..

[@joeolson6085]

How could the universe be created from nothing

[@TomTimeTraveler]

How fortunate we human beings are to even contemplate such questions, especially living in an era of tremendous scientific achievements. Imagine continuing to "achieve" millions of years into the future.

[@redmed10]

We have made massive technological change in the last 100 years. And that is essentially with the same brains we have had for the last 5,000 years. We cannot even imagine where we will be in a million years and even that is just a wink in the vastness of time.

[@andjusticeforall8813]

We’ve achieved nothing We are an awful species and one thing is most certain, the universe will miss us greedy idiotic egotistical evil morons when we’re completely gone Chemical scum and nothing more

[@TheUltimateSeeds]

The question of *"...Why is there anything at all?..."* is so perplexing that I have often wondered if even God (if such a Being exists) would know the answer.

[@csgowoes6319]

If God is truly an entity whose very existence requires no explanation or reason for existing, then he/she/it, and reality are far more mind-boggling than any of our science or religion give it credit. But then again it's not hard to imagine that reality is so much more than we can possibly conceive of.

[@TheUltimateSeeds]

@@csgowoes6319 Agreed, and nicely stated. Indeed, we humans are the metaphorical equivalent of amoebas who are simply not conscious enough to realize that we are not conscious enough to comprehend what exists above and outside of the confines of our little petri dish.

[@TheUltimateSeeds]

@@Hermetics Yes, Akos, everything is indeed mental. Which means that matter is simply the holographic-like substance through-which mind expresses (and replicates) itself.

[@virginiatyree6705]

@@csgowoes6319 , There's no god; sorry, not sorry. You'll find out eventually. Forever is a looooong time. Patience. v

[@virginiatyree6705]

Hey @@TheUltimateSeeds , Maybe, that's your opinion of about an amoeba & the petri dish, maybe. It's certainly not my conclusion. You'll eventually learn the answer to your questions. Patience is needed. v

[@deputydog1995]

Why is "nothing" the default, and "something" requires explaining? It could be the other way around.

[@xspotbox4400]

Wait and you will find out why nothing is fundamental some day.

[@Jared-ss3jx]

I think that's a great point and it's the core of the question. Clearly the default for the Universe IS to exist. So why is existence the default? Why is it more natural for the Universe to be the way it is rather than something else or to not be anything at all?

[@TheQuranExplainsItself]

Because the “something” is finite.

[@Jared-ss3jx]

@@TheQuranExplainsItself we don't know if the Universe is infinite or finite. For me personally it would be deeply surprising if the universe turned out to be finite.

[@TheQuranExplainsItself]

@@Jared-ss3jx what part of the universe may be infinite?

[@moses777exodus]

The concept of "Nothing" represented by the number "0" (zero) did not exist in the beginning. The number "0" (zero) is a relatively recent human innovation in mathematics. But, there has always been "1" (one). The fact that one (1) exists and can generate the position/concept of "nothing" (0) shows that there first exists one (1). Thus, nothing (0) does not truly exist alone: One (1) must first exist that can generate the position/concept of nothing (0). Mathematically, Absolute nothing "could be" expressed as 0 to the power of 0, which can equal 1. "Nothing" IS "Something"; because, it comes from "Something". Moreover, since Nothing (perceived) is not Nothing (actual), then it is possible for Something to come from Nothing (actual). Because, Something (1) is inherently pre-existing within Nothing (actual), hence, 0 to the power of 0 can equal 1. Simply put, Something (1) exists before Nothing (0) can exist. In the beginning, there was Singularity (1).

[@asmomair]

Scepticism or otherwise called philosophy knows only to raise questions and whatever answers are put forward, they become questions themselves!!

[@ezbody]

Better stick with fairy tales, believing the fantasies of other human beings who are no different from us.

[@noegojimmy]

@@ezbody Ofc. Why use intellect and think, try to solve (humans doing that since ever)? Just except some final ridiculous conceptions , stop wondering and thinking (solving). Essentially stop being human. More chances I gave to religion, more questions arised which couldn't be answered by clerks. By mid teens we went separate ways.

[@hkicgh7277]

@@noegojimmy which question couldn't be answered by clerks? I'm curious

[@noegojimmy]

@@hkicgh7277 To be clear: clerks blabbered, but never gave sensible answer. Mostly avoided the point of the question. I thought to myself that these people are more full of crap then my fucking father

[@aaron2709]

Yes, philosophy is good for asking questions, science is good for answering questions.

[@lk9650]

You can ask this question about anything within the universe but when you ask it about the universe itself it hurts your brain because it feels like a nonsensical question. Nothing in something makes sense, but nothing in nothing doesn't. It's obvious that the universe has to exist and it can't be any other way but we can't explain why.

[@virginiatyree6705]

Hey Levan, It's an illusion-correct? v

[@lk9650]

@The Truth of the Matter When we talk about the absence of something like water we can say "there is no water in this bottle" or "there is no water on this planet", a statement "there is no water" by itself doesn't make sense if you don't specify where that water is absent from. The universe is not contained within anything else, saying there is no universe is like saying "there is no universe in the universe", there is no place for the universe to be absent from. This is not a proof, but this is the reason why the idea of the universe not existing feels like a logical fallacy.

[@lk9650]

@@virginiatyree6705 If life is an illusion all it means that our reality is different from what it seems to be to us, but it doesn't mean that there is no reality or the universe. Someone has to be experiencing this illusion.

[@xspotbox4400]

If something had to exist, why this, why not something better and more beautiful?

[@lk9650]

@The Truth of the Matter You and I are talking about two different things, you are talking about the observable universe, I'm talking about the whole reality which cannot by definition be contained within a larger structure. I'm arguing that reality itself cannot be absent, this is just my opinion, I'm not providing any proof.

[@szkoclaw]

If there is nothing, there are no laws preventing something to happen.

[@francesco5581]

nice semantic play BUT in nothingness nothing happens .

[@xspotbox4400]

From what?

[@fatmaramadan6928]

If there is absolutely nothing. .....there is nowhere for any possibilities or anything at all to happen.

[@paulg444]

Some questions are not ready to be asked... here I really appreciative the interviewer. He just comes through and Keith Ward makes a real contribution on the toughest problem ever posed. I think I will look up more Keith Ward.

[@runningray]

What is the point of creation, if you can't share it? All creators that I know, love to share their creations and take joy in the sharing, why not the ultimate creator? As Frank Herbert wrote "The mystery of life isn't a problem to solve, but a reality to experience."

[@David.C.Velasquez]

"god" is the infinite and timeless multiverse itself. "nothing" cannot exist, because it is just that, nothing: the absence of existence. Even moses quoted god replying to the question of his nature, "I am that I am"

[@serenityindeed]

Saying ""nothing" cannot exist, because it is just that, nothing" is arguing semantics, it moves the question to "why is there existence instead of an absence of existence".

[@David.C.Velasquez]

@@serenityindeed The absence of existence, is more than just an issue with semantics, it is the literal definition of nothing. Normally I would invoke the strong anthropic principle, but if you are looking to answer the question why. 'Why?" is too loaded with the subjective bias of a human human point of view.

[@XYisnotXX]

"Nothing is that which rocks dream about", Aristotle.

[@ManiBalajiC]

Well God doesn't prove anything, how would you invoke a entity which always existed, conscious and powerful without thinking the basis or need for such entity to emerge in first place. Either why something rather than nothing question is not logical, nothing can be a state when the universe ends too. Something might be violation which shouldn't have happened or might have happened due to imbalance in nothingness.

[@David.C.Velasquez]

@@ManiBalajiC My friend, I believe you are correct, god doesn't prove anything, and I do not propose to invoke a supernatural conscious entity as an answer. That is counter to scientific reasoning, but from a philosophical perspective, the word "god" is loaded with antiquated, anthropomorphic and anthropocentric notions that should be left in the past. If you believe that the universe ends in heat death with black holes eventually evaporating, even in that scenario, there will be something... quantum fluctuations.

[@alpha.wintermute]

The more I listen the more I love and respect Closer To Truth's interviews

[@sketchtwenty2]

I took the question “why is there anything” to be the question of existence itself. Existence (coming from the Latin existere/exsistere) means to stand out, to be visible. Standing out requires division from some other thing that stands out in its stead. Standing out requires dimensions (extension, mass, location in space time). It must begin somewhere and end somewhere else. What of a thing exists out side itself? No thing of a thing exists outside itself. So to exist the thing is contained by it’s no thing, or more properly nothing. It is the nothing of a thing that allows another thing to be it’s own something. Turns out that nothing is simply a function of existence and not its opposite at all. If existence were to cease not even nothing would be left because it would take nothing along with it. Given that nothing cannot be an alternative there remains just one conclusion: Existence is because there is no alternative to it. It is necessary in and of itself.

[@fraser405]

My thoughts exactly. Just a bit longer and better said.

[@heshercharacter5555]

First define existence.. is it having an objective reality? Is empty space still existence? Well, yes. Can we actually comprehend non-existence? I don't think so. Is it true that if you can conceptualise nothingness you paradoxically falsify it? Therefore I think the question 'why is there something rather than nothing?' is in itself not valid.

[@xspotbox4400]

Ok, but why this, why not something better, more exciting and beautiful?

[@storksforever2000]

Yeah but you can conceptualize the absence of something. There's not an elephant in front of me. Now just apply that to literally everything.

[@ManiBalajiC]

Nothingness is what space is expanding into, it might also be the state when everything dies off in the Universe.

[@andreasplosky8516]

"Why Is There Anything At All?" They can talk for weeks on end, but it comes always down to "don't know".

[@junevivali1548]

🎯

[@EatMoreCarbs256]

that’s it but that’s the beauty of philosophy, just trying to figure it out as best as when can. we’re designed to try to know but we’ll never know until we’re all done

[@rm18068]

Instead of asking the question why there is something ? One must ask can there be nothing ?. Then we might get an answer.

[@quantumdecoherence1289]

This is the real question. We have no examples of "nothing". Empty space, like Krauss espouses, is teeming with quantum particles and energy flickering in and out of existence.

[@aaron2709]

They did talk about this... imagined worlds. If one can image nothingness, it would be possible.

[@junevivali1548]

Nothing to me is trying to imagine what it was like before my birth ..it wasnt even nothing..it was just ________

[@jamesconner8275]

Another interviewee good at double speak. I believe all philosophers are just word sorcerers.

[@JohnPopcorn06]

or maybe u don't get the point? 🤔

[@acdude5266]

Aren't we all? At least they ask the big questions.

[@baronvonhoughton]

@@JohnPopcorn06 "The point" You clearly didn't listen or understand his multifaceted answers. Yet you berate others.

[@ck58npj72]

@yogi don't forget to donate your life to the tax exempt organisation promising a deathless death.

[@WintersWar]

a 7 minute bull session. Check your pocket for your wallet around guys like this.

[@ThePinkus]

My current take on "why there is anything at all?" is that it is not properly a question. I maintain that a question, a properly framed question, is actually defined by its possible answers (I thank Bas van Fraasen for this notion). Respect to this criterion, I consider that the current state of our logics (plural when considering both classical and quantum) does not allow us to conceive any possible answer to the question. More specifically, any causation (as any recursive justification) is trivially excluded as it justifies one term from another when we need to justify all terms, thus we need an intrinsic necessity for existence, even in the form of an intrinsic impossibility of no existence at all. But this is something logics do not achieve. We don't have a rationalistic way to ascertain that something must exist, we just observe that something exist and we are currently dependent on this. This state of our knowledge implies that we cannot conceive any possible answer to the question, which is the same as the impossibility of properly framing what the question should mean to meet what we propose to ask. What in practice we actually achieve by saying the phrase thus falls short of even posing the question, and what it does is instead to state, affirm, our wonder at existence. It is, in the factuality of our current capacities, a statement, not a question. It is phrased as a question, but its semantic reduces to that of a statement. And it is, in a sense, part of the wonder at the gap (or distinction) between our (abstract, formal) knowledge and understanding, on one hand, and the given fact of our experience, on the other.

[@artsmart]

Robert is asking the very question most of us ask at some point in our lives. Most see it as a mostly futile exercise but some, like R.K. never give up. I have to believe that we're limited by some greater power and can't see beyond a certain veil. I also believe in an afterlife where we'll learn more when we die. Science will likely never accept the spiritual possibilities.

[@alexb2082]

If there ever were "nothing," then that includes reasons to bring "something" into existence. Therefore it doesn't seem possible to ever have a nothing before everything.

[@pdutube]

It's a nonsensical question though, what is "nothing"? There's no evidence for it, we can't detect it, so why is this even a question? It may be a fun philosophical question to have an idea of an absence of all things but then that would be a thing, in as much as a concept is a thing.

[@quantumdecoherence1289]

Since there Is no "nothing", or at least we have no examples of it, then it is a valid question. Between those two possibilities, and as far as we know, the only two possibilities that exist, why is it that something exists ?

[@xspotbox4400]

Actually, nothing is quite real, we can observe children being born and people dying all the time.

[@eyebee-sea4444]

Surely "nothing" can't be detected because it is the _absence_ of existence. The question isn't "what is nothing" but "why is there anything"?

[@storksforever2000]

You don't have to define "nothing". Just the absence of things. You can imagine the absence of things.

[@pdutube]

@@eyebee-sea4444 The position on why is there anything, however, is not the default position. The default position is that there are things. So to ask why there are things rather than no things, shifts the burden of proof to those who would permit that such a condition (no-things) can even be possible.

[@jamesnordblom855]

What makes you so certain that there is anything. Perhaps it's your (my) imagination.

[@soubhikmukherjee6871]

You got it 👍. Reality is a giant hallucination.

[@suatustel746]

Your response is no more than threadbare clichés!!!!

[@jamesnordblom855]

@@suatustel746 Glad you liked it.

[@suatustel746]

@@jamesnordblom855 did l like what? Your ramblings??

[@HotDiceMiniatures]

imagination is by itself something. c'mon mannnn get with the program.

[@nietztsuki]

Joseph Campbell would say that to ask "Does God exist?" is nonsensical. God, or Ultimate Reality, is beyond our finite categories of thought. "Existence" is merely a word which defines one of those finite categories. And words are mere boxes that exclude other words which definite differentiating categories of thought; ergo finite. God, therefore, neither "is" nor "isn't." Said another way, any god which "exists" would not be God since existence is a finite category of limitation.

[@magikarpolycarp]

The mystery of life is not a problem to solve, but a reality to experience.

[@verycoldhardybles790]

Is there anything? Nothing is stationary. Eveeything is an illusion

[@gurusoft1]

Purpose of Life: It’s for the Delight of the Supreme to be experienced by humans in infinite variation.

[@eyebee-sea4444]

After 3:10 Kuhn gives up. He realizes that he will not get any serious answer.

[@bozo5632]

Not 2:10?

[@tylerlynch2849]

Always sad to see that Kuhn and the bulk of his fanbase here are unacquainted with the basics of the Western philosophical tradition

[@aroundyouaroundme]

Personally I find the question as one of the hardest to grasp and pondering, because when you start thinking "ok, let's imagine there is nothing at all" you immediately dive in a deep deep water of of strange logical contraversies

[@joeolson6085]

If there’s nothing at all how would you even pose the question

[@francesco5581]

The question that i fear will never have an answer ...because no matter what are the deepest explanations about reality you will always ask yourself "Then why not something else ?"... No matter the explanations God can give , no matter the explanations that science can give , you will always ask yourself "and why this rather than nothing ?" ............................................................................ Or maybe not ?

[@virginiatyree6705]

There's no god. Nothing, you may find, will be ok. Possibly, you're not ready for your answer. Keep trying & have a lovely life...v

[@francesco5581]

@@virginiatyree6705 why this nihilism that we cant find an answer that will please everyone ??

[@virginiatyree6705]

@@francesco5581 , Who's everyone & why in the world would I want to please everyone? My conclusion is everyone needs to figure things out for themselves. Life is worth living. Earth is beautiful, wish we'd stop trying to destroy it. My opinion, is only my opinion. v

[@rafael.frigori]

Q: Why is there anything at all? A: Because you are (here) observing it.

[@HotDiceMiniatures]

That's not why, it's just proof. "Why is the dog barking? Because I can hear it."

[@rafael.frigori]

​@@HotDiceMiniatures wrong! Observation has collapsed the dog's wave-function bringing it to existence, therefore there is no dog out there when its not observed ;-)

[@HotDiceMiniatures]

@@rafael.frigori Are you suggesting that dogs themselves are not agents of consciousness? I hope the wavefunction thing becomes the meme it deserves to be.

[@rafael.frigori]

@@HotDiceMiniatures this is physics, not a meme at all ;-) Well, an "observer" has not to be a conscious being, but you would need Quantum Mechanics 101 to understand measurement (and so observation) at a more precise/quantitative level.

[@HotDiceMiniatures]

@@rafael.frigori I'm picking up what you're putting down. I mistook your second comment as pertaining to the Stuart Hammerof theories. They may be valid, maybe not, but "the dogs wavefunction" just reads as gobldygook at first blush. I retract my original comment!

[@travsb1984]

"I think, therefore I am." When you FULLY understand the statement and everything it entails you would know that it answers all of the nuances within the questions being asked by this guy. A lot of modern physicist types think they understand the universe at a fundamental level better than philosophers did thousands of years ago, or that they understand it better and can ask the real, deeper questions. They do not... I think, therefore I am.

[@xspotbox4400]

Sure, but think what would happen if ancient philosophers could see modern technological discoveries, don't you think smart people as they were would change their mind about their own ideas?

[@aaron2709]

That statement only points to the consciousness contained in your skull, no further.

[@travsb1984]

@@aaron2709 Nope, I already addressed that idea. Clearly you do not "Fully" understand the implications of the statement, as I said.

[@travsb1984]

@@xspotbox4400 LOL, I think they would say "you see, we were right all along" or at least as close to the truth as one can get... The journey that most technical people make through life is to start out ignorant, relying on supernatural phenomenon to explain things we don't understand. Then we become partially educated and narcissistic casting the supernatural explanations aside as silly and ignorant, assuming we have or will learn all the "true" answers. Then we become fully educated and realize we don't really know anything at all, and what we do know is actually an illusion of sorts. From there the most likely explanation becomes supernatural in nature, whether that is in the form of a God or simply believing in the unconfined powers of an interconnected universe itself. The answers to the most fundamental questions of the universe, like the ones posed here, can only be explained philosophically.

[@aaron2709]

@@travsb1984 Oh. you're one of those who thinks you have access to secret knowledge and understanding. Best wishes with your delusion.

[@georgejecu3693]

"we don't know" basically.

[@ezbody]

It's very simple and short, say it with me: *"I just don't know".* See how much time you save when you are being honest with yourself. 😏

[@virginiatyree6705]

And, eventually the answer will be given to me. I am a patient human, patiently waiting...v

[@SandipChitale]

...as of now. And if one is curious start investigating.

[@ManiBalajiC]

Well you would never know if you gonna think like that

[@xyz-ns7ym]

Unsettling question when you start thinking about it

[@Jared-ss3jx]

For me the most profound questions that humans can ask rn are: the easy problem of consciousness, the hard problem of consciousness, the theory of everything, and the hard problem of existence (aka why is there anything at all?)

[@drybeanburrito]

The reason there is something rather than nothing isn’t a cause, because if you’re asking why there is anything, this includes everything, including any possible causes. Rather, I think that one of your guests, Paul Davies, came closest to answering this question than anyone on your show when he said that there are only two non-arbitrary states of reality: everything existing and nothing existing. The truth of it, I think, is that there is only one non-arbitrary state of reality: every possibility (including nothingness) existing all at once in superposition. This is because, as Jim Holt’s book Why Does The World Exist, says in the beginning, (I’m paraphrasing) with no individual entity to determine what exists and what it’s nature is (because if the entity is individualized as opposed to existing as a superposition of all states, a “choice” has already been made, where out of all possibilities, this possibility was actualized, requiring a cause) that the initial state of reality is completely undetermined and so it is completely free to be anything and everything. Another way to put it is nothingness is only one possibility out of many, with no cause to determine whether nothingness or any other possibility exists, each possibility becomes equal and all exist in superposition. Since God is uncaused, we can think of this superposition as (maybe) God.

[@dongshengdi773]

you can say it better than me

[@coconuttcp2574]

The universe “I can hear living creatures inside me asking why is there anything at all!”, “I should be the one asking them WTF are you doing inside of me?!”

[@experiencemystique4982]

Excellent

[@loganpaulrfsfe4952]

But if we are inside the universe, is the universe inside of something?

[@coconuttcp2574]

Inside a black hole? Which in-turn inside a universe? Who is inside of who?

[@stoictraveler1]

Nice. We are the anomaly.

[@stoictraveler1]

@@loganpaulrfsfe4952 I don't think so. Un less you simply mean the observable universe

[@Old_Shoe]

Robert, I’ve enjoyed your work for a long time, and I believe I share some of your passions. It seems obvious to me that any personal understanding of the true nature of the universe cannot be obtained by a mind trapped inside of it. If we get any answers at all it will be after our exit. My numerous explorations of consciousness - through meditation, psychedelics, and ritual practice - all seem to indicate that on a certain level nothing we perceive is actually “real” and the closest we can come to experiencing the “truth” is an inner state of complete unknowing. Modern science echoes this in many ways. I hope your search for the truth brings you joy, including the fact that your questions will never be answered :)

[@HotDiceMiniatures]

This is pretty much what Donald Hoffman has been saying! Couldn't agree more .

[@virginiatyree6705]

They don't need to be answered, at all. v

[@xspotbox4400]

As long as we're part of something, at least we have a chance of understanding.

[@virginiatyree6705]

@@xspotbox4400 , We are nothing, so being part of something, may be an illusion. At least I'll keep trying to find out. v

[@xspotbox4400]

@@virginiatyree6705 Not sure why Einstein was talking about persistent illusion, doesn't seems so persisting to him no more.

[@drewpowers7236]

My big takeaway here: I need to be having deep philosophical discussions with someone whose company I enjoy on beautiful days in cemeteries...as soon as possible and on the regular

[@AnimationRevolution]

I really, really enjoy cheesecake. Therefore, the universe exists.

[@virginiatyree6705]

😂😂😂😋...v

[@xspotbox4400]

All those cheesecakes, but you love only one flavor.

[@DaP84]

"The cake is a lie!"

[@sliceofbread29yrago52]

Good point

[@rjd53]

It's a valid argument. You did not prove it isn't.

[@lowket]

I think Buddha would have an answer like: "There is no 'why'. There is, and that's good enough." In other words: there is anything at all, because it can.

[@dongshengdi773]

@The Truth of the Matter The Buddha did not answer the most important existential questions . 14 Questionr: 1. Is the world eternal? 2. ...or not? 3. ...or both? 4. ...or neither? (Pali texts omit "both" and "neither") 5. Is the world finite? 6. ...or not? 7. ...or both? 8. ...or neither? (Pali texts omit "both" and "neither") 9. Is the self identical with the body? 10. ...or is it different from the body? 11. Does the Tathagata (Buddha) exist after death? 12. ...or not? 13. ...or both? 14. ...or neither?

[@virginiatyree6705]

@@dongshengdi773 , Maybe...v

[@virginiatyree6705]

@The Truth of the Matter , Geez, You're have a difficult time finding out about the true purpose of existence. I feel for you. Good luck with your quest. v

[@virginiatyree6705]

@The Truth of the Matter , If I knew you in real-life, maybe, your opinion may be different, maybe. I think a lot of people struggle with their existence. Be well, cause being unwell isn't fun. v

[@virginiatyree6705]

@The Truth of the Matter , Good to read. I am happy for you. I think eventually the unanswered questions I have will be answered; the eternal realistic optimist, I am. &, if not, I am certainly going to try & find those ol answers; just forgot where I put them-he he. v

[@JoeZorzin]

A great book on this topic, "Why Does The World Exist" by Jim Holt.

[@kenperlman2204]

Or “Something from Nothing” by Lawrence Krause.

[@gitaarmanad3048]

To fully understand why there is something, rather than nothing, we must explore the question 'What is nothing?' And the first aswer to that question would be that nothing is everything that isn't something. But don't stop there...

[@CBT5777]

If there was nothing, it would be infinite.

[@ManiBalajiC]

@@CBT5777 which can also start after the universe dies off, something to infinite or eternal nothingness.

[@iampracticingpiano]

We don’t know the question, but the answer is 42.

[@virginiatyree6705]

Naw, 77.

[@rjd53]

@@virginiatyree6705 Let's make a compromise: it's 59,5.

[@virginiatyree6705]

@@rjd53 , Sure, why not? v

[@dandananda]

Because nothing, by definition, doesn’t exist. Therefore there’s only one option: something must exist.

[@ToothBrush531]

I just had this thought during work and it drove me crazy for like half an hour

[@garybala000]

There are only 2 possibilities or ways it can all originally be. 1. Non-existence in a timeless eternity (WITH the potentiality of existence eventually coming from it). 2. Non-existence in a timeless eternity (WITHOUT the potentiality of existence ever coming from it). It cannot be No. 2, because we and the universe are here - or at least the illusion of it (and we and the universe - or the illusion of it - are NOT non-existence). That leaves No. 1. Well eternity is an awfully long time kids. Especially towards the end. Everything in short will happen. Thus, eternity ensures that No. 1 Non-existence ultimately and paradoxically must lead to Existence.

[@cps_Zen_Run]

One might ask, “Why is there a forest“ Valid question perhaps, but don’t miss the enjoyment of nature.

[@TheProdigalMeowMeowMeowReturns]

Those other questions do *not* “pale in comparison” to the question of why anything at all exists. Those questions are interwoven, since e.g. “God” in classical theism IS an answer to the aforementioned question of why existence rather than not.

[@PaulHoward108]

"Nothing" is a concept, so if nothing exists, concepts exist. Everything is also a concept, as is each thing, and all collections of things. This works simply because reality is essentially conceptual.

[@soubhikmukherjee6871]

You seem to be following my man Leo Gura. You're making some serious progress then. He's already answered that question.

[@HotDiceMiniatures]

Something can be thought of as a concept while existing as a fundamental reality at the same time. Nothing being a concept to a perceiver outside of it doesn't make its nothingness anyless nothing.

[@noegojimmy]

My thougts. Allow me to say it this way: Nothing is Something, so essentially ,as you said , concept was always there. Concept of time is screwing with our minds, but I think there is no time (linearity)on the endless plane of creation/non creation. "IT" just is.

[@PaulHoward108]

@@HotDiceMiniatures If "nothing" is part of a relationship, that's not nothing.

[@xspotbox4400]

Nothing is not a concept, it doesn't relate to anything.

[@SandipChitale]

The sunlight of KZbin videos makes their strained arguments accessible to many and the pushback against their speculative arguments is working. At least they now start with "if we assume that there is a reason....". But after that jumps/leaps to the causes are astonishing still.

[@bozo5632]

"Objective value." That's funny.

[@rjd53]

What is funny about it? Explain.

[@Anabsurdsuggestion]

Yeah. That really is.

[@bozo5632]

@@rjd53 Never explain a joke.

[@browngreen933]

Mankind: "Why?" Existence: Total silence.

[@Ed-quadF]

The intelligent design guys are always amusing.

[@rjd53]

No one in this video is talking about intelligent desighn.

[@magikarpolycarp]

Keith Ward affirms evolution. See the video “Keith Ward tears fundamentalism apart part 1”.

[@carefulcarpenter]

To know oneself. People know a lot about everything else--- for the most part. I live in the City of the Holy Cross. In a 10 year period I went door to door looking for small jobs. It is a college town. An honest carpenter looking for work to pay mortgage and basic family needs was mostly ignored. I am a wealth creator--- but they could not see that either--- except those who hired me. Referral does not work for people such as me. My customers tried very hard to help me. "To know love is to know trust; to know oneself is to know truth." cc

[@carefulcarpenter]

Jesus was a trouble-making revolutionary. Let's make a religion that guarantees his kind can never return. 😁

[@jimmycranier3668]

To think that there is something for us only would be crazy , obviously this something contains many living existences beyond our tiny vision.

[@stephenwatts2649]

The notion of Consciousness is steeped in mystery and debate, and although it is still generally considered to be human only, there are now schools of thought emerging that believe some animals have ‘consciousness’ as well. The idea that it is an attribute unique to us as human beings arises from the fact that we have an awareness of ourselves and the world we live in, unlike most or any of the other creatures. This awareness we have forms the basis of ‘the self’. The reason for our becoming self-conscious, or self-aware, creatures will become apparent later on, when we begin exploring the nature of being human in greater detail. But this human self-consciousness is something quite different in nature to the reality of the Consciousness that lies behind and within everything to appear as the myriad forms in existence. Consciousness inhabits and animates creation and its creatures not unlike the power that flows through a computer to make it work in accordance with the hardware and software of the device. By this analogy, the specific physical characteristics of a creature’s body constitute the hardware, and the programming of its mind the software. These things are important to understand because if this conceptual ground is not firm, the model we build from here will not endure, and its potential value will be lost. What all this is pointing to is that what you really are―what we all are―is an eternal, unlimited energy source capable of creating and experiencing events. What you are is this creative source, this Consciousness. Who you are is how this Consciousness works through you to express as something unique in the world. Powerful creative Consciousness is your true and essential nature, but of course, you experience your life through the limitations of a human body, so it may not seem that you are an all-powerful being at times, or indeed ever. By its very nature, the body exists as some ‘thing’ and is, therefore, a limitation or restriction of ‘everything else possible’, to become something specific and useful―a human being. And then it must be remembered that these bodies we inhabit are a product of Mother Earth, and have developed for good reasons. Although today there are many philosophes, theories and just sheer guesses put forward to explain the purpose of our existence, none of them fully describe or satisfactorily explain the original intention for our emergence. Some bodies born into this world have, or will develop over time, physical or mental attributes that further alter the creative opportunities and experiences available to them in a lifetime. The influence of our national culture, the general culture of our times, and the impact of our upbringing by parents and other significant people also become major influences that can place limitations on our thinking and power. Other restrictions occur as a result of the pains we might experience in life, the emotions that often get buried in the body as a result, and the accumulating limited beliefs they then give rise to. There is also the concept of ‘karmic debt’ that will limit opportunities, and this too will be discussed later in the work. The state of your own evolved Consciousness is another factor affecting personal power. All these things limit the opportunities you have in life, and so it can be seen that although your true nature is something quite grand, you find yourself in very limiting circumstances. But it is important to keep perspective. Your essential nature is a free and unlimited Consciousness, a potential capable of eternal creation and experience. And this Consciousness was the reality before the Universe that we know emerged.

[@zebonautsmith1541]

matter is mostly empty space. Nothingness has merely slightly changed it’s properties.

[@3NikolaTesla]

If you have a ceiling fan that’s made of 1 inch blades but those blades were spinning at an incredible speed, is it really empty? We only factor in the size of the electron in an atom but not the speed it’s traveling and space it’s taking up spinning

[@chestertan9369]

The why question is essentially a living being's inquisitive nature especially that of a human. I find how things happened will serve enough purpose without conjuring hypothesis of a god which leads no where. Sometimes it is what it is...

[@BeachBumZero]

OR the hypothesis of God leads everywhere... the very access to all possibilities. I like that better than nowhere.

[@yashrajpranami1]

As per my understanding Nothing cannot be in its purity until there is something in contrast. That something could be anything as there are infinite possibilities. Therefore anything that is possible must exist and this universe is one of those possibilities. As life goes by and changes that appear are improvisation and addition to that something. It is possible that in some other universe what changes are going to happen has already been happened and so there is possibility for future prediction if our awareness Transcends the limitation of mind that is bound to experience time. One may think "Why anything we think of comes into existence as it is also something that could exist." It could happen but in other universe but not in ours. Unicorns could exist in other universe but not ours. but may be possible to exist in this on if Bio Science goes through some tremendous insights relating to genetics and DNA editing. Both nothingness and infinite somethings can be called as God as both are required for something to exist and nothing to 'not' exist(symbolism cant explain). In Hinduism Shiva is symbolism of that which is not. It is said to attain nirvana is to become nothing once again and only nothing can transcend illusions of mind and become all conscious still not involved in it. Just empty witness. Just by looking at existence without any thought of awareness caused by self identification, nothing exist at all as there would be no thought of existence.

[@NeverTakeNoCut-offs]

What the heck is a "reason"??

[@VallaMusic]

one simply has to let go of the idea of 'NOTHING' - there can be no such thing as nothing - pure and simple - existence itself is the Eternal IS - it is what it is and that's all there is to it - the concept of 'nothingness' is nothing less than ridiculous - of course one can intellectually entertain the thought of an existence where existence itself does not exist - lol - but it does hurt the brain cells to do so, does it not ?

[@iphaze]

I think that there’s something to the notion of perfection not being allowed to exist without observation. Perhaps existence is the opposite side of the coin to non existence because non existence wouldn’t be complete without it. Perfection is without time, our observation of existence is the answer to that. Kind of like ying and yang, there needs to be balance.

[@WaveFunctionCollapsed]

4:40 how can infinity is exhaustive

[@mandelbraught2728]

One sign your argument is on shaky ground: citing Aristotle.

[@JamesBermingham]

We will be forever chasing the tail. Never quite getting there.

[@williamesselman3102]

unless you accept Christ

[@InPursuitOfCuriosity]

This is such a valuable channel on KZbin - one that makes you think deeply about the world around you and wonder about the what, how and why!

[@mriswith88]

The only reason we struggle with this question is because our minds think that it can conceive of true absolute nothingness, but it actually can't. What exactly is nothing? How can you possibly define nothingness? What are you mentally picturing when you think of nothingness? Is it death? Is it deep space? The center of a black hole? An all white void? An all black void? Those are all things. I dare you to define the concept of nothingness without referring to SOMETHING. In fact, the only way we can define the color black is by the absence of visible light, which is still a thing. There is no such thing as "nothingness", as far as our minds can conceive. You can only talk about the negation of an existing thing, or the lack of a thing relative to another thing. But the concept of a total lack of ALL things is ill-defined, paradoxical, and silly. The first axiom of mathematics (appropriately named the Axiom of Existence) states that something must exist. Period. So this question is basically asking why an axiom is true. You might as well ask why 1 is equal to 1.

[@teddybear9029]

That’s the trouble with the human species we assume everything from our own perspective!

[@hhpoa]

More recently, however, people is more opened to listening the perspectives of their pets.

[@OliverSidla_SLR]

I am struggling with the meaning of the word. contingent resp. contingency - could someone explain?

[@virginiatyree6705]

Suggestion: Use the browser that's on your computer/phone. Please. v

[@gwenelbro3719]

We are not in the world, the world is in us.

[@votingcitizen]

"good"? "worthwhile"? "valuable"? "a reason"? the fallacy is in the insistence in making the universe dependent on conscious perception of it. It brings up the old joke - "Does anything happen after death?" "Yes, lots of things happen but they just don't involve you."

[@patrickkillabrew6207]

Perhaps the absence of everything is impossible. When one universe ends… BANG… another begins.

[@ManiBalajiC]

May be nothing is what gonna be there when the universe ends, it's all gonna be nothing forever and ever. Cause it you think there is a definite need for another big bang then it's a rule which proposes a creator.

[@MsAssylum]

Consiousness is nothing and conciousness is everything.Nothing = Anything

[@danielogwara3984]

If you want to understand the answers to these questions through the use of logic and reason, I recommend you find the channel of MorgueOfficial. Be ready to have you mind stretched while you use your own reason to dissect what he teaches. He attacks the subject from the perspective of philosophy, mainstream science, ontological mathematics and even religious allegorical writings. But his system gives priority to ontological mathematics as the infallible way to know ultimate reality. If you care about knowledge you should look up his channel.

[@xspotbox4400]

I won't, you did and can't present us with a single example of his woo.

[@danielogwara3984]

@@xspotbox4400 That’s because you are lazy. You want to a crash course. Do you work and spend the time to learn for yourself. It’s not like you are paying for the lessons.

[@xspotbox4400]

@@danielogwara3984 Now i'm certain that's BS, you are preaching about morals, not providing examples of enlightened thought. Did you learn that on his stupid channel?

[@vishalshukla4090]

Love from 🇮🇳

[@davidwade4291]

I think the confusion comes from a bias of the human brain. That bias is a belief in the existence of "nothing". Try to find nothing, the absence of matter and energy. The thing is everywhere you look you're going to find something, even if it's only quarks popping in and out of existence. "Nothing" is a figment of the imagination. Meaning we shouldn't ask "Why is there something instead of nothing?" but "Where did we get the idea that somewhere there's nothing?"

[@stangadomski]

Most fundamental question...

[@rjd53]

I don't think so. More fundamental is: What do I live for? What should I live for? That can be answered independently of why the Universe exists. It exists, and that has consequences, whether there are reasons for its existence or not.

[@stangadomski]

@@rjd53 Life is an anomaly,.Known only on Earth, "What do I live for?" is a temporary question, soon will be not relevant.

[@rjd53]

@@stangadomski You're not the only person in the Universe, not even on earth. Don't you have children, a family, parents to care for? What do you work? Who do you work for? Does what you earn your money with do good for anybody? Does it contribute to civilisation, to culture, to progress? These are the points related to the question what does one live for. Not to take that question seriously is unsocial and a failure to take on responsibility.

[@stangadomski]

@@rjd53 My answer has been removed? www.cbk.waw.pl/~sgadomsk I am 81, did what I liked and was even paid for it. Now I am freelance translator into Polish from English, German. French, Russian and Czech. I am useful for my blind wife. My only son is 56. I have answered your not relevant questions

[@rjd53]

@@stangadomski I worked as a teacher. And I wanted the young when they leave school and begin their lives to ask themselves these questions I've formulated. Okay, we disagree on this. Very profoundly. But I do not intend this to become personal or offensive. So, let's leave it at that. And I wish you and your wife the very best.

[@medusaskull9625]

Doesn't the "why" question always imply that there is a conscious choice? Why do they ask "why" instead of "how"?

[@rogerschofer1542]

Isn’t this just a re-hash of Anselm’s argument for the existence of God? ie. he “necessarily” exits because that’s a feature of at least one definition of God? The argument given in this video strikes me as very similar.

[@csgowoes6319]

Didn't he actually mention Anselm? Maybe you missed it, certainly it's not a new argument.

[@rogerschofer1542]

@@csgowoes6319 He might have, in which case I missed it…but if he did, then I’m at least glad I was able to recognize the argument.

[@bjlyon615]

The way we think tells us that there must be a beginning to reality.. But what if our way of thinking is wrong? What if reality has always existed?

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

Is nothing considered a possibility, and if nothing is a possibility, then any and all possibilities exist?

[@engelbertus1406]

to a hyperintelligent state of thought, any paradoxal concept will make fully sense - Hence, anything and nothing could be exactly the same perception, rather dissolve into exactly the same. If you believe one thing is true, you oppose to the other part being true, thus missing out on a greater part of universal truth. Without separateness, anything and/or nothing make perfect sense :)

[@mickeymoon7547]

There are way more ways of existence (an infinite number of ways) then there are ways of non-existence (only one way); therefore, the odds for there being something are infinitely greater than the odds for there being nothing.

[@HyzersGR]

Complete nothingness is impossible. The fact that this reality that we know exists means there are possibilities and thus you can never eliminate possibilities.

[@barneyrubble1431]

did these guys ever mention that if nothing existed, nothing does and still exists? (as in nothing will exist)

[@Old_Shoe]

To get to the other side

[@nicolascalandruccio]

In m'y opinion, at least, the question exists because we are there and we are able to ask it. Conversely, if any universe exists with nothing inside which is able to sense it, how a distinction between nothing and something is possible? It could be anything, maybe a crazy one with crazy laws of physics, the same or nothing. But inside them, there's no difference at all because no sensor is able to detect or distinguish something from nothing.

[@tylerlynch2849]

Keith Ward is a fantastic interlocutor. So happy to see him on the show

[@mugin11223344]

The first question must be, Can there can be nothing? Many of Robert Lawrence Kuhn's questions are loaded question.

[@suatustel746]

No, noth can only be associated something...

[@adespade119]

Wouldn't nothing violate the uncertainty principle?

[@jasonruffjr3107]

These guys are like very smart hippies "What is everything man!"

[@partridgehearne]

Until we know how much we can understand there is no point in trying to understand anything.

[@rtk3543]

Things exist only because of consciousness.

[@stoictraveler1]

This is the question I am least concerned with. There is something, so let's learn all about it.

[@rjd53]

Makes sense to me. Because I think maybe we cannot answer that question in principle.

[@vincef7487]

Once you answer the question: “Does God exist?”, then the answer to: “Why is there something rather than nothing?” becomes obvious. . . . and closer to the truth.

[@storksforever2000]

Why does there need to be an eternal God? Why not an eternal Universe? It's the same thing.

[@vincef7487]

@@storksforever2000 Eternal God and an eternal universe are the same thing in that both are eternal. The difference is that God created the universe …and everything in it. Once you answer the question: “Does God exist?”, it ALL falls into place.

[@ManiBalajiC]

@@vincef7487 imagine this you are talking about an entity which existed forever or came to existence and attained enough power to create something as big as universe. It's Very hard to even consider how it would have attained conscious or power or a logic to create something like this..

[@vincef7487]

@@ManiBalajiC Yuuup. It’s incredibly hard to imagine God’s creativity. Pull up “Google Earth”on your computer or phone. Now imagine how tiny a human being would be on earth. Now imagine that tiny spec of an entity figuring out the meaning of life. It’s RIDICULOUS! The greatest minds on earth can’t come anywhere close to the intellect of GOD. THINK ABOUT IT.

[@storksforever2000]

@@vincef7487 But who created God? Why an uncreated God but not an uncreated Universe?

[@christianbaughn199]

The title is "why is there anything at all", as in why is there something rather than nothing, and he doesn't get close to acknowledging what he's been asked, let alone answering that question. Why all the talk about reasons, and the example he gave of pleasurable things existing and the reason they exist is because we enjoy them. Pure philosophical garbage and the answering of a question he wants to talk about rather than the one he's been asked