KARL JASPERS FORUM

TA79 (J Johnson)

Commentary 34

"QUESTION REGARDING EXISTENCE"
by Adhanom Andemicael
12 July 2005, posted 23 July 2005

Is the following argument valid or invalid?

Argument:

<1>

Let us consider the statement:

S1: "Nothing exists."

<2>

There seems to be something inherently contradictory in this statement.

<3>

In order for a situation to exist, the situation has to persist. The word "persistence" implies a "passage of time." If a situation persists, then time necessarily passes (i.e., time necessarily exists).

<4>

Can a state of affairs in which "nothing exists" persist ? The answer seems to be "no." If this state of affairs were to persist, time would exist (i.e., time would pass). If time were to exist, then, obviously, something *would* exist. (*Time* would exist.) And we would not be able to claim that "nothing exists."

<5>

In order for a situation to exist, the situation has to persist. A state of affairs in which "nothing exists" cannot persist. Therefore, a state of affairs in which "nothing exists" cannot exist.

<6>

Something must always exist.

<7>

(But what could this "something" be ? An eternal "mind" of some sort?)

--------------------------------------

Adhanom Andemicael