Quote:
Quote by: rez  1) There is a universe.
2) We want to explain it.
3) There are many competing and conflicting explanations.
4) What criterion will we use to prefer one explanation over another?
5) When we have chosen an explanation should we stick with it? |
1) I agree. Existence exists.
2) Not only do we want to explain the universe and understand it, we
need to understand it in order to survive.
3), 4), 5) There are many competing and conflicting explanations for the existence of the universe, yet many of these fail for one basic reason. That reason is that existence is a
self-sufficient primary. That means that (a) nothing is antecedent to existence, (b) there is nothing that stands apart from existence, and (c) there is no alternative to existence.
(a) If an entity existed before existence, then that entity becomes part of existence.
(b) Everything that exists is part of existence.
(c) Nonexistence does not exist. If it did, then there would be a contradiction in terms (an entity that does not exist cannot also exist at the same time). Nonexistence does not exist, rather, it is the
absence of existence.
Existence just is. It requires no proof, no explanation, and one cannot refute it.