[lit-ideas] Re: Why Is There Something Rather Than Nothing?
- From: "" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Redacted sender "Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx" for DMARC)
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 18:22:11 -0400 (EDT)
In a message dated 5/16/2014 1:01:11 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
As to why the universe is a something rather than a mere nothing, this is
a separate question. Which I'll answer later.
Donal
Head hurts
Excellent reply. I'll analyse it later, I hope, too.
McEvoy ends his interesting pro-Popperian post,
"As to why the universe is a something rather than a mere nothing, this is
a separate question."
Indeed.
For we have two clauses here, in the subject line as per post sent by T.
Fjeld:
i. Why is there something rather than nothing?
seems to _presuppose_, shall we say,
ii. There is something, rather than nothing.
And it was (ii) that we've been addressing so far. They 'why' question
IMPLICATES, I'd like to say, an answer of the type:
iii. There is something, rather than nothing, because R.
where
iv. R
is a _proposition_ (e.g. "God exists", as I think is the implicature in T.
Fjeld's post) or other. I thought of entitling the thing 'rationes
essendi', or 'ratio essendi', and/or implicate Leibniz in the proceedings.
Maybe
tomorrow.
Cheers,
Speranza
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
