Something rather than Nothing?

[Nade]

I've always been a little confused as to why proffessional philosophers have struggled to answer this question for so long. It's marked as an unsolvable question, but I never understood why. Here's my reasoning behind this question:

something exists because by definition, if it didn't exist, it would be nothing. But nothing, by definition then, would have to not exist. If nothing existed, it would be something, and thus exist. Therefore, something exists instead of nothing because if nothing does exist, then something exists as opposed to nothing. And nothing can't exist, so the only thing that would be existing would be something.

Therefore something exists as opposed to nothing exists.
What's so difficult about that?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

And exactly how does all that address the question of why the universe (i.e. the sum total of all the "somethings") exists?

 

[Willamena]

I've always been a little confused as to why proffessional philosophers have struggled to answer this question for so long. It's marked as an unsolvable question, but I never understood why. Here's my reasoning behind this question:

something exists because by definition, if it didn't exist, it would be nothing. But nothing, by definition then, would have to not exist. If nothing existed, it would be something, and thus exist. Therefore, something exists instead of nothing because if nothing does exist, then something exists as opposed to nothing. And nothing can't exist, so the only thing that would be existing would be something.

Therefore something exists as opposed to nothing exists.
What's so difficult about that?

"Definition" is a picture of a piece of the universe, a model (if you like) built in language. The problem is, what do you get when you remove all the somethings from that picture? A picture still exists of a nicely defined nothing.

We approach the ontological puzzle from the standpoint of our individual pictures that we (the knower, the observer) each paint. We know something, which we define, and we know nothing, which we also define; and in knowing nothing it exists for us.

 

[Surya Deva]

Come again

I have to admit, I tried reading what you said several times, and still could not understand it! Alright, I read it again, and realised the sequence(I think!) basically you've just restated the age old philosophical question: Something exists rather than nothing, without actually answering it.

The question isn't to prove that something exists. Rather the question asks why does something exist rather than nothing? I would like to share with you just how much this question has hurt my head through the ages! When I was an athiest I would constantly grapple with this and it would blow my brain! I accepted as an atheist that I am just the body and I will cease to exist someday, and I also accepted as a materalist there was a time when there was no observer. It was just nothingness. Then I tried to imagine what it would be like to have nothing and I couldn't do it! Even now going through the same thought experiment I just can't do it. I cannot imagine a universe existing beyond anything I can imagine, and if there was such a universe, it would still be a something!

I have matured slightly in my understanding, or you could argue I have taken a faith perspective. If you look at the liar paradox, such as "this statement is lying" you begin to understand something about existence. If the statement is true, then it is false. If it is false, then it is true. Yet the fact that the statement exists is true, only its predicate is undecided. I think fundamentally at the heart of existence is a contradiction between true and false, and it is this contradiction which produces existence and consciousness. I consider the universe to be a logical thing and it the logic of contradiction which leads to existence and consciousness. Thus I concluded that existence and consciousness was the same thing. Then discovered that Hindus had concluded the same: Atman = Brahman. Then I converted to Hinduism

What do you think of this?