Existence exists. For this to be refuted, it must be accepted as true. Thus, refuting it is a logical contradiction, and we know that existence exists.
This being established, why does something exist rather than nothing?
Well, when we consider that nothing is actually something (though this is only true using our existence based logic), existence has to exist.... as for why, well, it makes things interesting doesn't it? Imagine if the universe was just a bunch of empty space... doesn't sound very exciting.
According to our current understanding of physics, every region of space is awash with different kinds of fields composed of waves of varying lengths. Each wave always has at least some energy. When physicists calculate the minimum amount of energy a wave can possess, they find that every cubic centimeter of empty space contains more energy than the total energy of all the matter in the known universe!
Space is not empty. It is full, a plenum as opposed to a vacuum, and is the ground for the existence of everything, including ourselves. The universe is not separate from this cosmic sea of energy, it is a ripple on its surface, a comparatively small "pattern of excitation" in the midst of an unimaginably vast ocean. "This excitation pattern is relatively autonomous and gives rise to approximately recurrent, stable and separable projections into a three-dimensional explicate order of manifestation," states Bohm.
Nothing is not something. Nothing is nothing at all. It is the complete and total absence of anything. Nothingness itself does not exist, it is only a concept that can be useful for philosophizing.
As I have pointed out in previous threads, the 'why' of things presupposes causality, and the 'meaning' of things presupposes consciousness.
The simple answer is that existence is the root node of everything. There could not have been a 'time' before existence, because then something -- that time -- would have existed. Although time is a concept and cannot actually exist in reality, when we say 'there existed a time when...' we are referring to a state of something (perhaps the universe) at some point previous to the current state.
Because there could necessarily have been no time before existence existed, there also could necessarily have been no causality before existence existed. Indeed there cannot have been anything before existence existed... the concept of 'before existence' is a contradiction.
But exploring the notion, we find that there can be no cause to which existence is the effect, and therefore no 'why' for existence, simply because causality presupposes existence.
Nothingness begets nothingness. You cannot go from nothing to something. I suppose that is why existence is the root node. Something always has existed, or else nothing would exist.
That is a bit irritating, though. Personally, I dislike some concepts of infinity, such as a universe having infinite space, or having always existed, etc., because they imply certain odd things, such as the human race having existed infinite times, and this specific situation having come up infinite times. :/
Existence exist because it can not be unable to exist. No matter how hard you try to make existence un-exist, you will fail. For existence to not exist, it must have never have existed in the first place. Existence exist, so it would be self evident that existence does exist, making it the reason it exist.
Nothingness begets nothingness. You cannot go from nothing to something. I suppose that is why existence is the root node. Something always has existed, or else nothing would exist.
That is a bit irritating, though. Personally, I dislike some concepts of infinity, such as a universe having infinite space, or having always existed, etc., because they imply certain odd things, such as the human race having existed infinite times, and this specific situation having come up infinite times. :/
Why does existence exist?
