Nothing generally gets a bad rap; think of all the times, for instance, that your parents complained you were spending your summer doing nothing, or recall that time you got fired for doing nothing on the job.
Or consider what a drag it is when you have nothing in your belly, your wallet, or you bank account.
Nor is it particularly pleasant when someone you care for says he or she feels nothing for you.
And who hasn’t ever felt like a big nothing? There’s really nothing worse.
So, we will agree that by-and-large, nothing is to be eschewed. If it comes down to a choice between nothing and something—so long as it isn’t something that requires a trip to the DMV—the latter is to be preferred.
And yet, perhaps the case against nothing is overstated. Nothing may have something going for it after all.
Take, for example, the important role that nothing has in professional sports: a baseball game in which a pitcher gives up no hits, or a nothing-nothing tie in soccer. Nothing clearly makes a big difference in such cases; the absence of something turns out to be something quite significant.
Similarly, if it weren’t for all the people in the world who aren’t nothing, how could there be anyone to be construed as something? It may not be a logical necessity but it does seem a practical requirement.
Of course, I’m saying nothing new here, which is really much of the point I’m meaning to make: nothing matters, and in the end, it does.
If I have nothing else to say, I may as well say it and so, here I am, making nothing of this, over and over.
Many philosophers have long considered the question, “Why is there something rather than nothing?” to be the most fundamental of all philosophical questions. I have nothing to offer in opposition to that and indeed, have nothing but praise for nothing at all.
Or consider what a drag it is when you have nothing in your belly, your wallet, or you bank account.
Nor is it particularly pleasant when someone you care for says he or she feels nothing for you.
And who hasn’t ever felt like a big nothing? There’s really nothing worse.
So, we will agree that by-and-large, nothing is to be eschewed. If it comes down to a choice between nothing and something—so long as it isn’t something that requires a trip to the DMV—the latter is to be preferred.
And yet, perhaps the case against nothing is overstated. Nothing may have something going for it after all.
Take, for example, the important role that nothing has in professional sports: a baseball game in which a pitcher gives up no hits, or a nothing-nothing tie in soccer. Nothing clearly makes a big difference in such cases; the absence of something turns out to be something quite significant.
Similarly, if it weren’t for all the people in the world who aren’t nothing, how could there be anyone to be construed as something? It may not be a logical necessity but it does seem a practical requirement.
Of course, I’m saying nothing new here, which is really much of the point I’m meaning to make: nothing matters, and in the end, it does.
If I have nothing else to say, I may as well say it and so, here I am, making nothing of this, over and over.
Many philosophers have long considered the question, “Why is there something rather than nothing?” to be the most fundamental of all philosophical questions. I have nothing to offer in opposition to that and indeed, have nothing but praise for nothing at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment