Chapter 1: The Ontological Query

The inquiry "Why is there something rather than nothing?" has become entangled in the debates surrounding new atheism. These discussions often skim the surface, leading to arguments that stray from the essence of the question, leaving us to sift through the remnants of misunderstanding. Physicist Lawrence M. Krauss authored a book titled "A Universe From Nothing," which includes a foreword by Richard Dawkins. Dawkins asserts, “Even the last remaining trump card of the theologian, ‘Why is there something rather than nothing?,’ shrivels up before your eyes as you read these pages.”

This perspective reflects a trend in an age where philosophy appears to wane in influence, while science seems to dominate our understanding. This viewpoint posits that science a) is the wellspring of knowledge, and b) possesses no epistemological boundaries—implying it can explain everything. However, the question 'why is there something rather than nothing?' is inherently one that science cannot address. Failing to recognize this limitation encapsulates the core issue of our current worldview. Whatever entities exist, the very fact of their existence cannot be elucidated by scientific law alone. Science fundamentally presupposes the reality of being; it cannot commence without acknowledging this truth.

Krauss's proposition that a universe can emerge from a state of 'nothing' misinterprets 'nothing'—it cannot be truly 'nothing' if there are laws governing the creation of a universe. Essentially, he is suggesting a causal framework that transitions one state into another, all while relying on the notion of being as an a priori assumption.

The inquiry does not merely point to the Big Bang, suggesting it remains unexplainable or that it represents science's “one free miracle.” Instead, it probes why any contingent existence is present now or has ever been. It raises questions about the absurdity, givenness, and contingency of existence, highlighting that scientific laws do not account for why things are as they are. Temporal causation does not create existence, and the nature of emergence, as we experience it, fosters a world that cannot be distilled into discrete 'things.' Thus, the question transforms into Quod quid est—'what truly constitutes a thing?' or 'why does being exist?'

This recognition is pivotal. While reality can be interpreted through scientific lenses, certain realms elude its objective scrutiny. The essence of existence invites us to the brink of reality's mystery, prompting inquiries that must be articulated in varied forms, embracing experience and subjectivity. This approach allows us to perceive reality in its expansive entirety.

Traditionally, this domain has been associated with what we term religion. In the context of new atheism, 'religion' is often dismissed as mere superstition predating scientific thought. While there is some truth to this, the shallow nature of many debates reflects both religious perspectives and their critiques, yet overlooks the broad spectrum of meaning that religion encompasses. Historically, culture—encompassing art, architecture, music, and poetry—has been framed by the sacred and informed by religious thought. Religion embodies the imaginative, the mythic, and the metaphorical, invoking feelings of awe, joy, and gratitude.

The diminishing depth in contemporary culture mirrors the prevailing scientific narrative that reduces the question of being to a shrug or a definitive scientific answer. Consequently, our culture is increasingly characterized by a sense of indifference and cynicism toward existence.

This decline is perhaps most evident in the notable absence of poetry in modern society. Poetry, inherently metaphorical, cannot be boiled down to 'objective' truth, nor is it entirely subjective. Yet, society increasingly rejects these categories, viewing 'truth' as either strictly objective or randomly subjective. As a result, poetry is often seen as either contrived or merely ornamental, lacking the depth to convey meaning beyond simpler expressions. It is telling that very few people could name the current poet laureate of the United States or the UK, while countless could easily name contemporary Hollywood actors.

This observation is not a trivial complaint about cultural superficiality. It underscores the profound implications of misunderstanding the question, "Why is there something rather than nothing?" Our societal lack of sacred space and a language that acknowledges the limitations of objective reality impedes our ability to engage with the essence of existence.

In "I Drink Therefore I Am," philosopher Roger Scruton emphasizes that even a simple act, like enjoying a glass of wine, can be a philosophical reflection. He draws inspiration from the Vedas, which suggest that Soma, the deity of wine, is worthy of worship, linking it to divine bliss and the essence of being. Scruton contends that even the most mundane actions can offer insights into the inner nature of existence.

These moments of awareness are the true essence of philosophical inquiry. Nothing can be fully articulated in a definitive way. The question of existence requires recognition of our participation in it—acknowledging that we are part of its givenness. A revival of our understanding of existence may begin with a genuine reevaluation of the ontological question, recognizing the profound insights we have overlooked.

This video, titled "Why is There Something Rather Than Nothing? - The Most Logical Response to the Question," delves into the intricacies of the ontological question and its philosophical implications.

Chapter 2: The Ontological Fallacy

The second video, "What's Wrong with the Ontotheological Fallacy?" (Marilyn McCord Adams), provides critical insights into the relationship between theology and philosophy, challenging misconceptions about ontological arguments.