Dominic wrote:
> that that question itself is absurd, if there was 'nothing' and there
> was a 'why' to that 'nothing'; if it had a cause, then there wouldn't
> be nothing, there would be the cause: something.
The question is "why is there something", not "why is there nothing". The
question does not presuppose a "why" for nothing.
"Nothing" does not require an explanation, whereas "something" would seem
to.
Jonathan Colvin
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Mon Mar 06 2006 - 01:55:05 PST