ONLINE FIRST
published on September 2, 2023
B.A. Worthington
https://doi.org/10.5840/ipq2023830205
Why is There Something Rather Than Nothing?
The argument rests on earlier work questioning the Russellian separation of levels and arguing that Russellian levels should be taken to include the levels of particle and aggregate, and generality and detail. That earlier work argues from the non-separation of particle and aggregate that predictability is limited and that physics cannot come to an end. This leads to a view of the world as flux. Identifiable objects demanding explanation can only be temporary entities emerging from flux and explanation can only be local and historical. This precludes explanation of totality and leads us to reject Leibniz¡¯s question. Baldwin¡¯s argument from possible worlds theory that a null world is possible is examined and questioned. Koon¡¯s combination of the kalam argument with the grim reaper paradox is not queried but a way is found of circumventing it. It is noted in passing that the argument does not have the anti-theistic implications which may appear.