359
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 31:
Line 31: + + +
Debate:Why is there something rather than nothing? (view source)
Revision as of 03:39, May 17, 2008
, 03:39, May 17, 2008no edit summary
"''...that is just as unsatisfying as saying that god created everything. A more serious, but not less unsatisfying answer might actually be that it is impossible for 'nothing' to exist. All attempts to define or describe nothing lead us to something.''". On the contrary, I find the idea that attempts to define/describe nothing fail as unconvincing, partly because the problem is likely that not being familiar with "nothing" simply makes it difficult for us to comprehend. But as far as definitions go, how about "nothing is the absence of anything". Furthermore, saying that "God created everything" is unsatisfying is merely an assertion that is not self-evident. I find it quite satisfying. What is so unsatisfying about it? I mean, if "unsatisfying" is the strongest argument that can be raised against God creating, there is no argument. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:55, 27 May 2007 (EDT)
"''...that is just as unsatisfying as saying that god created everything. A more serious, but not less unsatisfying answer might actually be that it is impossible for 'nothing' to exist. All attempts to define or describe nothing lead us to something.''". On the contrary, I find the idea that attempts to define/describe nothing fail as unconvincing, partly because the problem is likely that not being familiar with "nothing" simply makes it difficult for us to comprehend. But as far as definitions go, how about "nothing is the absence of anything". Furthermore, saying that "God created everything" is unsatisfying is merely an assertion that is not self-evident. I find it quite satisfying. What is so unsatisfying about it? I mean, if "unsatisfying" is the strongest argument that can be raised against God creating, there is no argument. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:55, 27 May 2007 (EDT)
I believe that the relationship between something and nothing is the same as the relationship between life and death. One's purpose is to create the other. There is such a thing as a healthy forest fire. It destroys dead and decaying trees-causing death-but out of the ashes healthy new saplings spring up, and continue the life of the forest.--[[User:JArneal|JArneal]] 23:39, 16 May 2008 (EDT)
==Why Not?==
==Why Not?==