Nothingness of nothingness and the metaphysical universe

We live in a metaphysical universe: first comes the void and then the physical; first comes the uncontaminated and then the contaminated, first comes the abstract and then the concrete; in short, the unspeakable comes before the speakable.

For billions and billions of years the universe was only an infinite vacuum. Nothingness of nothingness dominated. Parmenides’ “Is” ought to be transformed in Parmenides’ “Is not”.

Then, one day, spontaneously, the material appeared, the first particle, therefore life!

Now, when we talk about this last phenomenon called “life”, what do we know about it? It’s enough to know that it’s made up of particles – atoms, molecules, proteins, cells, bacteria, microbes, viruses, germs, pains etc.? And what does all this string of names tell us about real life? And before nothingness, what was there? Nothingness of nothingness. Ok, in this case nothingness of nothingness is the basis of our cosmic foundation. If so, then, all our scientific and philosophical knowledge must be reviewed.

I have an idea about this. That is? To see if we can improve our cosmic vision in a simple way. For example? There are many ways to find out this and each way more complicated than the other. I would propose something simple, very simple. What? I would propose to take 5 types of universes distinct from each other and among these 5 types of universes we must choose and give a vote to the one that seems to be like ours or the most close to ours. This knowledge should help us to have a better understanding about our cosmic basis as well as of the entire universe.

So, what are we waiting for?

Okay, here I now enumerate 5 universes in this way:

The first: a universe created by a crazy god.

The second: a stationary universe.

The third: a universe that arose casually, randomly.

The fourth: a universe created by a good, omnipotent and omniscient god.

The fifth: a naturally, genuinely appeared universe.

If we were able to understand in which of these 5 universes we are living, probably many things that today appear obscure to us, could become clearer and easier to comprehend tomorrow. Which, then, which of these 5 universes could be ours? And what vote would we give, from 1 to 10, to each of them? Let’s start with:

The first: what vote would we give to a universe created by a crazy god, from 1 to 10? (4)

The second: what vote would we give to a stationary universe, always from 1 to 10? (2)

The third: what vote would we give to a universe that arose randomly, always from 1 to 10? (9).

The fourth: what vote would we give to a universe created by a good, omnipotent and omniscient god, always on a scale of 1 to 10? (0 -).

The fifth: what vote would we give to a universe that appeared naturally, always from 1 to 10? (10 +)

Some might think, and rightly too, that I have not been objective in these votes. I don’t deny it. It’s possible that I was biased. My vote is subjective and can only be subjective: I’m a human being! However, if I could say something in my favor, I would say that I tried hard to give a logical and inherent vote to the real properties of the voted universe.

In any case, it seems right to me to take up again the 5 given votes and try to explain them in a critical way.

A good idea.

Let’s start with the first. To a universe created by a crazy god, I proposed a 4. Why? Because having to live in a universe that wasn’t created by a benevolent, virtuous, and wise being, but by a crazy one, so from 1 to 10, a 4 could be fine.

The second. How did I rate a stationary universe, always from 1 to 10? I gave it 2. Why 2? Because the stationary universe is an illogical, senseless, gratuitous universe. It is a mass of cosmic stuff thrown out there in space without knowing where it comes from and without a but or a why. It lacks a base, it lacks a nothingness of nothingness! In other words, it’s inhuman and a 2 is good.

The third. I gave to a casually, randomly appeared universe a 9. Why? Because it is the kind of universe, out of all those named here, that is probable, real, true.

The fourth. I gave a universe created by a good, omnipotent and omniscient god like ours a 0 -, and that’s okay. Why? Because no god or human being or worm could have created a world worse than ours. We live in the most catastrophic, cruel, deadly and absurd of all possible worlds, and moreover without a reason and without a sense, just grotesque. Such a world could never have been created by a good, all-powerful and all-knowing god. If the universe we live in was truly created by a good, omnipotent and omniscient god, then this god deserves, not a vote, but the guillotine!

The fifth. I gave to a universe that arose naturally, physiologically, spontaneously, instinctively, always from 1 to 10, 10 +. My vote is not a biased one. At all. The universe was born naturally from nothingness out of nothingness. It might as well not have been born. Therefore, the 10 + given seems to me to be a fair vote for this type of universe.

I add what follows before finishing: I am firmly convinced that the evil number one in our planetary society is due to the unwillingness to accept reality as it is, and this is done for favorite and private interests. It’s time to accept ourselves for who we really are; it’s time to eliminate all our prejudices, injustices and social and mental absurdities. If we don’t, it has nothing to do with a god or any other creative phenomenon that we wish to think of, but it has to do with ourselves, and more precisely, with our beastly nature, our selfishness and our academic ignorance.

The copyright of “Nothingness of nothingness and the metaphysical universe,” is mine. Thank you, and thank you for reading me.