Sophia 48 (4) (2009)
|Abstract||A review article on Leszek Kołakowski’s, ‘ Why is There Something Rather Than Nothing ?’ centering on Leibniz’s famous Question.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||No categories specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Jonathan Barnes (1993). A Big, Big D? The Classical Review 43 (02):304-.
Theodore Schick Jr (1998). The 'Big Bang' Argument for the Existence of God. Philo 1 (1):95-104.
J. R. McMillan (2003). NICE, the Draft Fertility Guideline and Dodging the Big Question. Journal of Medical Ethics 29 (6):313-314.
William Lane Craig (1993). Theism, Atheism, and Big Bang Cosmology. Oxford University Press.
Mark Noonan (2000). The Big Question. Philosophy Now 30:53-54.
Quentin Smith (1992). A Big Bang Cosmological Argument for God's Nonexistence. Faith and Philosophy 9 (2):217-237.
Richard Sylla (1991). The Progressive Era and the Political Economy of Big Government∗. Critical Review 5 (4):531-557.
Susan M. Wolf (2008). Neurolaw: The Big Question. American Journal of Bioethics 8 (1):21 – 22.
Added to index2009-09-21
Total downloads45 ( #24,580 of 549,370 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #15,251 of 549,370 )
How can I increase my downloads?
|Start a new thread||There is 1 thread in this forum|
The “Jocaxian Nothingness” (JN) is the “Nothingness” that exists. It is a physical system devoid not only of physical elements and physical laws, but also of rules of any kind.
In order to understand and intuit JN as an “existent nothingness”, we can mentally build it as follows: we withdraw all the matter, energy and the field they generate from the universe. Then we can withdraw dark energy and dark matter. What is left is something that is not the nonexistent. Let us continue our mental experiment and suppress elements of the universe: now, we withdraw physical laws and spatial dimensions. If we do not forget to withdraw anything, what is left is a JN: an existent nothingness.
JN is different from the Nothingness we generally think of. The commonly believed nothingness, which we might call “Trivial Nothingness” to distinguish it from the JN, is something from which nothing can arise, that is, the “Trivial Nothing” follows a rule: “Nothing can happen”. Thus, the “Trivial Nothingness ... (read more)