“As I read this surprisingly upbeat exploration of current philosophical and scientific thought on the age-old mystery of existence itself—why, quite simply, there is something rather than nothing—a depressing question kept occurring to me. Do college students, I wondered, still sit around their dorm rooms arguing such questions into the wee hours of the morning?”
Check out Questions of Being — What if our minds are the ultimate reality? for a review by Jay Tolson of Jim Holt’s Why Does the World Exist? An Existential Detective Story.
That a temporal world should be known and, in being known, sustained and perpetually created by a timeless consciousness is an idea which contains nothing self-contradictory.
Aldous Huxley, “Eternity and Time,” The American Scholar, Summer 1945.
Perhaps easier said than done, but interesting regardless.
One such question is, “Are the Continental philosophers really philosophers?” Analytic philosophers, because they identify philosophical ability with argumentative skill and notice that there is nothing that they would consider an argument in the bulk of Heidegger or Foucault, suggest that these must be people who tried to be philosophers and failed – incompetent philosophers. This is as silly as saying Plato was an incompetent sophist, or that a hedgehog is an incompetent fox… We should really just drop the question of what philosophy really is or who really counts as a philosopher… If we put aside wistful talk of bridge-building and joining forces, we can see the analytic-Continental split as both permanent and harmless.
For the scientist, man is no more than an observer of the universe in its manifold manifestations.