Re: WHY DOES ANYTHING EXIST

From: Stephen Paul King <stephenk1.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 12:09:23 -0400

Dear Norman,

    Existence, itself, can not be said to require an explanation for such
would be a requirement that there is a necessitate prior to which Existence
is dependent upon. Pearce's idea is not new and we have it from many
thinkers that the totality of the multiverse must sum to zero, that is the
essence of symmetry. It is the actuality of the content of our individual
experiences (including all of the asymmetries) that we have to justify.

Stephen

----- Original Message -----
From: "Norman Samish" <ncsamish.domain.name.hidden>
To: <everything-list.domain.name.hidden>
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 10:15 AM
Subject: WHY DOES ANYTHING EXIST


> Quentin Anciaux,
>
> Thanks for the explanation. Unlike much that is said here, I am able to
> understand what you mean. But it's not satisfying, and the core mystery
> remains. Even if Pearce is correct and everything in the multiverse
> self-cancels and adds up to zero, so what? That is not an explanation of
> existence.
>
> Obviously, we don't know THE answer - do you (or anybody) think there CAN
> be
> an answer that does not require supernatural intervention? What might it
> be?
>
> My wife says the answer is "Because."
>
Received on Wed May 18 2005 - 12:45:20 PDT