Advertisement

Why Is There Nothing Rather Than Something? An Essay in the Comparative Metaphysic of Nonbeing

  • Purushottama BilimoriaEmail author
Chapter
  • 67 Downloads
Part of the Sophia Studies in Cross-cultural Philosophy of Traditions and Cultures book series (SCPT, volume 30)

Abstract

This essay in the comparative metaphysic of nothingness begins by pondering why Leibniz thought of the converse question as the preeminent one. In Eastern philosophical thought, like the numeral ‘zero’ (śūnya) that Indian mathematicians first discovered, nothingness as non-being looms large and serves as the first quiver on the imponderables they seem to have encountered (e.g., ‘In the beginning was neither non-being what nor being: what was there, bottomless deep?’ ṚgVeda X.129). The concept of non-being and its permutations of nothing, negation, nullity, etc., receive more sophisticated treatment in the works of grammarians, ritual hermeneuticians, logicians, and their dialectical adversaries variously across Jaina and Buddhist schools. The present analysis follows the function of negation/the negative copula, nãn, and dialetheia in grammar and logic, then moves onto ontologies of non-existence and extinction and further suggestive tropes that tend to arrest rather than affirm the inexorable being-there of something. (This chapter is to be read in tandem with two aligned papers that have appeared since the first publication of this chapter (see above), namely, ‘Thinking Negation in Early Hinduism and Classical Indian Philosophy’ (Bilimoria 2017); and ‘Negation (Abhāva), Non-existents, and a Distinctive Pramāṇa in the Nyāya-Mīmāṃsā’ (Bilimoria 2016)).

After a discussion of interests in being (existence), non-being and nothingness in contemporary metaphysics, the article examines Heidegger’s extensive treatment of nothingness in his 1929 inaugural Freiburg lecture, ‘Was ist Metaphysik?’, published later as ‘What is Metaphysics?’ The essay however distances itself from any pretensions toward a doctrine of ‘Metaphysical’ at ‘Nihilism’.

Keywords

Non-being Nothingness Leibniz Heidegger Jaina Buddhist Nāgārjuna Mīmāṃsā Sylvan Noneism Nyāya Matilal 

References

  1. Armstrong, D. M. (2010). Sketch for a systematic metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bilimoria, P. (1995). Radhakrishnan – Saving the appearance in Plato’s academy. In S. S. Rama Rao Pappu (Ed.), New essays in the philosophy of Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan (pp. 327–344). New Delhi: Indian Books Centre.Google Scholar
  3. Bilimoria, P. (1997). On Śaṅkara’s attempted reconciliation of ‘You’ and ‘I’. In J. N. Mohanty & P. Bilimoria (Eds.), Relativism, suffering and beyond essays in memory of Bimal Matilal (pp. 252–276). New Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bilimoria, P. (2008a). Abhāva: Negation in logic, real non-existent, and a distinctive pramāṇa in the Mīmāṃsā. In M. Chakraborti, B. Lowe, M. N. Mitra, & S. Sarukkai (Eds.), Logic, Navya-Nyāya & applications homage to Bimal Krishna Matilal (Studies in logic) (Vol. 15, pp. 43–64). London: College Publications.Google Scholar
  5. Bilimoria, P. (2008b). Nietzsche as ‘Europe’s Buddha’ and Asia’s superman. Guest issue on continental philosophy of religion. Sophia, 47(3), 359–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bilimoria, P. (2010). Hegel’s spectre on Indian thought and its God-in-nothingness. Religions of South Asia, 4(2), 199–211.Google Scholar
  7. Bilimoria, P. (2011a). War and peace between science and religion: The divine arch after the four horsemen. Journal of the Indian Council of Philosophical Research (Delhi), 28(2), 3–30.Google Scholar
  8. Bilimoria, P. (2011b). Grief and mourning: For Renuka. Lecture for existentialist society, Melbourne, September 2011. Updated pdf at www.pbilimo.com
  9. Bilimoria, P. (2012a). Of grief and mourning: thinking a feeling, back to Robert Solomon. In K. Higgins & D. Sherman (Eds.), Passion, death & spirituality: The philosophy of Robert C Solomon (Sophia Series) (pp. 149–174). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bilimoria, P. (2012b). All India Radio: The war between science and religion a western import? Paper presented American academy of religion annual meeting, November.Google Scholar
  11. Bilimoria, P. (2016). Negation (abhāva), non-existents, and a distinctive pramāṇa in the Nyāya-Mīmāṃsā. In Purushottama Bilimoria with Michael Hemmingsen (Ed.), Comparative philosophy & J L Shaw (Sophia Series) (pp. 183–202). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bilimoria, P. (2017). Thinking negation in early Hinduism and classical Indian philosophy. Logica Universalis, 11(1), 13–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bilimoria, P., & Stansell, E. (2010). Suturing the body corporate (divine and human) in the Brāhmaṇic traditions. Special issue on panentheism and panpsychism. Sophia, 49(2), 237–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Borges, J. L. (2000). Labyrinths. (J. E. Irby, Trans.). London: Penguin Classics.Google Scholar
  15. Bosley, R. N. (2003). Jaspers on Lao Tzu, Nagarjuna, and dialectic. In J. W. Koterski & R. J. Langley (Eds.), Karl Jaspers on philosophy of history and history of philosophy. Amherst: Humanity Books.Google Scholar
  16. Chalmers, D. M., Manly, D., & Wasserman, R. (Eds.). Metametaphysics: new essays on the foundations of ontology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Charlesworth, M. J. (1970a). Summa theologiae, vol 15: The world order (Ia 110–119) (p. 2006). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Charlesworth, M. J. (1970b). Philosophy of religion the historic approach. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  19. Chattopadhyaya, D. P. (2006). The magic of zero, gun and gunpowder. In Religion, philosophy and science: a sketch of a global view. Shimla: Indian Institute of Advanced Studies.Google Scholar
  20. Chen, E. M. (1969). Nothingness and the mother principle in early Chinese Taoism. International Philosophical Quarterly, 9(3), 391–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. D’Amato, M. (2013). Buddhist fictionalism. Sophia, 52(3), 409–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dawkins, R. (1988). The blind watchmaker. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
  23. Doolan, G. T. (Ed.). (2012). The science of being as being: Metaphysical investigations. Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press.Google Scholar
  24. Flügel, P. (Ed.). (2012). Studies in Jaina history and culture: Disputes and dialogues. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Ganeri, J. (2001). Philosophy in classical India: The proper work of reason. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  26. Ganeri, J. (2008). Towards a formal regimentation of the Navya-Nyāya technical language I & II. In M. Chakraborti, B. Lowe, M. N. Mitra, & S. Sarukkai (Eds.), Logic, Navya-Nyāya & applications homage to Bimal Krishna Matilal (Studies in logic) (Vol. 15, pp. 105–138). London: College Publications.Google Scholar
  27. Garfield, J. L. (1995). The fundamental wisdom of the middle way: Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Garfield, J., & Priest, G. (2003). Nāgārjuna and the limits of thought. Philosophy East & West, 53(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Halbfass, W. (1992). On being and what there is: Classical Vaiśeṣika and the history of Indian ontology. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  30. Hart, K. (2004). Religion. In J. Reynolds & J. Roffe (Eds.), Understanding Derrida (chapter 7) (p. 2004). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  31. Heidegger, M. (1929). Was ist Metaphysik. Bonn: F. Cohen Verlag.Google Scholar
  32. Heidegger, M. (1993). What is metaphysics? In D. F. Krell (Ed.), Basic writings (pp. 89–110). San Francisco: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  33. Heidegger, M (1996). Being and time, a translation of Sein und Zeit, by Joan Staumbaugh. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  34. Hicks, S. V. (2003). Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Foucault: Nihilism and beyond. In A. Milchman & A. Rosenberg (Eds.), Foucault and Heidegger: Critical encounters (pp. 74–109). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  35. Hutchings, P. (2009). Why is there something rather than nothing?’ The big question. Review of Leszek Kołakowski, Why is there something rather than nothing. Sophia, 48(4), 479–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Inada, K. K. (1970). Nāgārjuna: A translation of his Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, with an introductory essay. Tokyo: Hokuseido Press.Google Scholar
  37. Jaspers, K. (1962, 1966). The operations of thought (chapter on Nāgārjuna). In The great Philosophers (2 Vols.). Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace and Company.Google Scholar
  38. Johnston, M. (2009). Saving God: Religion after idolatry. Trenton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kakol, P. (2009). In P. Bilimoria (Ed.), Emptiness and becoming: Integrating Madhyamika Buddhism and process philosophy. New Delhi: DKPrintWorld.Google Scholar
  40. Kenny, A. (1969). The five ways. New York: Schocken Books.Google Scholar
  41. Kisiel, T. (1995). The genesis of Heidegger’s being and time. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  42. Kołakowski, L. (2008). Why is there something rather than nothing? Questions from great Philosophers. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  43. Lao, T. (1963). The Way of Lao Tzu Tao-te Ching (Wing-Tsat Chan, Trans.). Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Company; also cited in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy http://plato.stanford.edu/ entries/laozi/
  44. Levine, M. P. (1994). Pantheism: A non-theistic concept of deity. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  45. Lewis, D. (1999). Papers in metaphysics and epistemology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Matilal, B. K. (1968). The Navya-Nyāya doctrine of negation: The semantics and ontology of negative statements in Navya-Nyāya philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Matilal, B. K. (1981). The central philosophy of Jainism – Anekāntavāda. Ahmedabad: L D Institute.Google Scholar
  48. Matilal, B. K. (1998). The character of logic in India. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  49. Phillips, S. H. (2006). Philosophy of religion: A global approach. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
  50. Price, H. (2009a). Metaphysics after Carnap: The ghost who walks? In D. Chalmers, D. Manley, & R. Wasserman (Eds.), Metametaphysics (pp. 320–346). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Price, H. (2009b). Metaphysics after Carnap: The ghost who walks? In D. Chalmers, D. Manley, & R. Wasserman (Eds.), Metametaphysics: New essays on the foundations of ontology (pp. 320–346). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Priest, G. (2005). Towards non-being: The logic and metaphysics of intentionality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sylvan, R. (1966). Some things do not exist. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 7, 251–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sylvan, R. (1976). The durability of impossible objects. Inquiry, 19, 247–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sylvan, R. (1980). Exploring Meinong’s jungle and beyond: An investigation of noneism and the theory of items. Canberra: Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University.Google Scholar
  56. Sylvan, R. (1997). Transcendental metaphysics: From radical to deep plurallism [sic]. Cambridge: The White Horse Press.Google Scholar
  57. Sylvan, R. (2000). In D. Hyde & G. Priest (Eds.), Sociative logic and their applications: Essays by the late Richard Sylvan. Ashgate Publishers: Aldershot.Google Scholar
  58. Taylor, M. C. (2007). After God: Religion and postmodernism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Van Fraassen, B. C. (1980). The scientific image. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Williamson, T. (1998). Bare possibilia. Erkenntnis 48 (2/3). http://www.jstor.org.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/stable/20012844?seq=3. Accessed 10 Sept 2012.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Historical and Philosophical StudiesUniversity of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.Graduate Theological Union and University of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations