In the pre-universe immaterial space as the first existent became actual space in the current universe
while creating the big bang.
The universe resides in space. Space is infinite, the universe is finite.
The universe is an object, like a ball is an object. Saying “universe” is like saying “galaxy” in that they are both objects made of matter, and they both reside in space.
Space is not an object made of matter, space is volume, which is 3 dimensional distance.
On a smaller scale, a gallon container has 1 gallon of space, but it can have a single drop of water in it. The drop of water represents the universe which resides in a 1 gallon container. The difference with the container is that it is a finite volume of space, whereas the universe resides in an INFINITE volume of space, because space continues in every direction infinitely. There is no alternative to infinite space because there is no way to end distance in any direction.
Motor, I like your view on space. Immaterial space is absolute, universal and necessary; it has no properties and serves to make everything possible being everything that mass and its derivatives are not. Mass could not create itself so immaterial space is the obvious creator; it was the first existent in the pre-universe–immaterial and eternal.
Let’s ignore Kant and Schopenhauer’s assessment of space and time, as a priori concept of the mind…
Let’s imagine space as some preexisting void…of infinite proportions, within which existence emerges.
Let’s ignore the Yin/Yang, or ancient Cosmogony narratives…
The simple mind imagines space as an emptiness with dimensions but no boundaries. It replaces ‘chaos’ - energetic randomness - with ‘emptiness, nothingness,’ creating a dualism to experienced ‘somethingness,’ which it then takes literally rather than representationally, because it hinger for certainty and finality and completeness.
In the Yin/Yang metaphor the chaotic is imperfect due to the presence of order, and the ordered is forever incomplete because of the presence of chaos.
The thing-in-itself can only exist in the mind…as ‘thing’ indicates order; interpreting it - using a priori concepts of space/time and causality - as the multiple kinds of matter/energy we call reality.
Schopenhauer places his ‘Will’ outside space/time and causality, unable to break free from the Abrahamic and eastern nihilistic dogmas he was affected by.
He replaced ‘Energy’ - alluded to in Helictites’ use of ‘fire’ as the representational metaphor - with ‘Will,’ implying more than he, perhaps, intended or could justify, since ‘will’ is only what differentiates life from non-life, referring to the act of focusing an organism’s energies upon an objective.
Its use as a universal substitute for Creator, is problematic.
Existence is imagined, by the ancients, as a cauldron being struck by some external force to produce the multifarious dynamism of existence.
In all cases the mind must project itself outside existence, in some non-existent state - to conceptualize existence as something other…as a one, a whole, a thing.
If the mind remains within the multiplicity of interactive dynamism, it must seek answers from within the existent, not in some projected, fantasy ‘outside’ existence - literally the non-existent.
Chaos, accurately defined as random energies that cannot be interpreted as things - ergo no-thingness, with spatial and temporal dimensions - is both the source of order and its consequence.
It also helps in defining and explaining why free-will is necessary, expressed though the observable experienced act of choice.
Not the word but the act comes first…and activity is what existence is.
Even the seemingly empty void is brimming, overflowing, with activity.
All is Energy.
Even the idea of ‘origins’ - beginnings & ends - alludes to something that exists only in the mind, limited by its binary methods of conceptualizing the intangible.
The Big Bang is often cited as the ‘beginning’ and yet the absolute point - singularity - is never found, because it does not exist anywhere but in the human mind.
All is a process with no beginnings and on ends…only approaches to what can never be finalized: the absolute, i.e., indivisible, immutable, singularity, whole one nil etc.
If we wish to conceptualize the ‘start’ of our own cosmos we must envision a choke point where the absolute is approached but not completed - Yin/Yang - because order and chaos are not absolutes but fluctuating - order = patterned; chaos=absence of pattern.
These chaotic energies explain how the present iteration of a cosmos emerges, how life emerges within it, how consciousness emerges, and why choice is fundamental to survival, and participates in what is being determined.
As the eastern sages say: “Nothingness is not nothing”…or something like that.
Here we must understand what ‘thing’ is, and what it represents.
If understood then no-thingness is literally no-thing…since order is what can be perceived and interpreted by a conscious being - reliant on order, being ordering itself - as a ‘thing.’
There are no ‘things’ in existence - things exist as obscure representations of fluctuating energies with a distinct pattern = repeating, consistent, predictable…
The origin is real, not just mental. Immaterial space In becoming actual (from potential) created the big bang which is equivalent to a singularity. My whole view fails if immaterial
space in the pre-universe is not the first existent. I began my original post with why there is something instead of nothing as follows: either something exists or NOTHING exists, but nothing DOES NOT EXIST. Something, therefore exist, and that something is immaterial space in the pre-universe as the first existent. L, I read your post and there is a lot to agree with.
All is energy.
Energy is perceived, by a consciousness, and interpreted as the different kinds of matter/energy.
Some energy is ordered some is not.
Chaotic energies were part of the so-called void…which we, ordering organisms like to think as a beginning of the world we can experience, because organisms, as products of order, can only experience order.
What lacks order, i.e., pattern, is interpreted as void, darkness.
No beginning.
From chaos order emerges and through interaction, i.e., attrition, it returns to chaos - cosmic cycle.
No-THING = chaos, since ‘thing’ is how the conscious mind interprets a pattern.
Nothing does not mean absolute emptiness…all is energy.
There is no absolute vaccume…even space has a temperature, it radiates measurable energies, i.e., interactions.
Space is as Kant defined it…a priori concept.
It is an interpretation of possibilities, making all order a probability within this expanding field of possibilities.
Both Kant and Schopenhauer were in agreement about space/time and causality, i.e., sufficient reason.
Random energies produce patterned energies, ergo the ancient Cosmogony begins with chaos and out of this chaos - randomness, emerges the perceived world, i.e., order.
This conceptualization of space as some kind of empty box of infinite proportions is how your organic mind can conceptualize unknown or expanding possibilities.
But if it helps you, then go with it.
What do I care?
Kant is my favorite philosopher; transcendentally, he had no peers in my view. I still think about his view of space–a mental creation. One Kantian who responded to
one of my post thought that space was immaterial. However, I am not a transcendental idealist but a materialist who thinks space is a real immaterial existent. If you care
to respond I will read your post.