Review of Why There is Something Rather Than Nothing
By Bede Rundle
THE ANSWER
Rundle answers the question on page 125: "...that there simply has to be something or other..."
And again on page 166: "...we can hold that if anything exists, matter exists, on the grounds that it is only in matter that the necessary independent existence is to be found."
And on page 183: "...since continuing in being is not something that requires explanation, the fact that the physical universe exists is not, it would appear, a fact in need of explanation."
THE METHOD
On page 193 [the last page] he says "The resolution of our queries has been seen to come from philosophy rather than from science." And "The kinds of question which physicists address at this level overlap with those which can be reckoned philosophical, questions of meaning being inescapable for cosmologists as well as for philosophers, but showing how presuppositions behind a question have to be abandoned, that the question itself is to be rejected as resting on an illusion, is a distinctively philosophical task."
I cite this last quote to establish that Rundle's solution is based on philosophical reasoning.
Starting on page 96, Rundle covers St. Thomas Aquinas' logical proof of the existence of God. Of course, the theists claim that God created the universe out of nothing.
Rundle spends the rest of his book using logic to prove the theists are wrong. Philosophically [using logic], he covers topics such as math, future and past events, the infinite, grammar, mind, will, force, and equality [=].
MY THOUGHTS
I was fascinated by Rundle's arguments, although many of them are difficult to follow. If you "believe" in logic, you are bound to accept his conclusions. However, I find logic to be a closed system, appropriate to limited applications, such as math. The syllogism:
All men are mortal
John is a man
Therefore John is mortal
The conclusion sounds like a valid one, unless one asks if the major premiss [all men are mortal] is a true statement. I say, along with others, that all men have not yet died, so it is a hypothetical statement.
So my conclusion is a realistic one. There is something rather than nothing because there is something rather than nothing.
