Has anyone argued this? I haven't formulated a coherent argument so I'm just throwing this out there to see if anyone has thought about this already. Intuitively I think it makes sense that everything must exist, that reality is an infinite multiverse. If true this offers an explanation for why we exist in this universe with these specific physical laws, because we must exist in this universe with these specific physical laws if reality is infinite. Furthermore, if reality is not only infinite but also eternal, with all time occurring simultaneously, if true this solves the problem of the infinite regress since there is no time before our universe existed if all moments of time are always occurring simultaneously. In short; all things, and all time, always.

Are there any arguments why everything must exist for something to exist? Are there any arguments for why something could exist without everything existing? For some reason I can't help but assume that the reason why there is something rather than nothing requires infinity. Why would some things exist instead of nothing unless all things exist? I'm interested to hear if anyone is familiar with arguments for or against this intuitive thought I hold.

  • 1
    "Intuitively I think it makes sense that everything must exist, that reality is an infinite multiverse" - welcome to philosophy, where "intuition" is questioned!
    – Frank
    Apr 24 at 20:00
  • For large values of 'Something'.
    – Scott Rowe
    Apr 25 at 0:03
  • 4
    What do you mean by "everything?" If it is the case that "something exists implies everything exists," then that would suggest that you would have propositions like "if there is a smallest natural number, then there is a largest natural number," which is obviously false.
    – Sandejo
    Apr 25 at 6:03
  • It is completely unclear what the word "everything" refers to in this question. Apr 27 at 18:48
  • Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer.
    – Community Bot
    May 1 at 19:12

1 Answer 1


I don't see how you conclude that if something exists, everything exists.

If we look at it from the angle of skepticsm, then you could argue that maybe you are in a dream, maybe you are just a mental projection in someone else's dream, maybe you are in a simulation, etc, you could make endless possibilities excluding the possibility that there is nothing, because nothing means being literally no thing, not even a void of space, so thus you must be something but you cannot be sure what something are you, but that doesn't mean everything or rather every possibility exists.

Also, the concept of an infinite multiverse is itself a possibility

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .