Philosophy becomes philosophy EXACTLY BECAUSE it always begins with the part — how else? — and attempts again and again to surpass its limit, every determined frontier of space, time and causality etc. Philosophy is philosophy only when it turns directly towards the whole and begins to conjure it — escaping the decoy of the particular and determined. Philosophical field is precisely that endless Totality, which by itself is nothing special even less something determined, but it is what it is in relation to the Part; Totality or the Whole is therefore something only when juxtaposed to the Part even if it means being its general negation, even if it be its open and undetermined frontier, and by incorporating into itself the part, it itself is a part. Totality is therefore determined only by part. Totality exists because the part exists. Certainly, part in general, because it is unimportant for Totality whether part is of this or that kind. It requires any, just any Part, and only its minimal fraction. It will remain what it is regardless of accuracy or any special determination, particularity and determination in general, no matter where and what a chance particularity may arise. It is that which can undergo various changes, appearance and disappearance. That which is always and anew left behind is the Unconquerable Totality. The magic of its necessity is the fact that it of itself has and makes no demands, no reason or request whatsoever for this or that particularity or determination. It can receive into itself and give birth to any and every particularity, simply everything. For this very reason it is universal: in this or that way here and everywhere. For this reason within it i.e. in general and everywhere, the principle of relativity is applicable:

THERE IS NO REASON, at least no special reason for any particularity or determination within the Universe.

Naturally the universal absence of a reason is the same as the absence of a counter reason, a complete indifference so to speak. If something is already something, and therefore such and such, then there is no reason for it to be otherwise.

One of the modes of expressing relativity is certainly inertia.

General and complete inertia. There is no reason for it to be otherwise. Always and all the same. And strangely, precisely this relativity is the FORCE OF MOTION of the entire Universe, and this just because it too is only a certain interrelation, therefore a particularity and determination. And this particularity and determination is certainly within the whole, it is the relationship of the whole towards the part, therefore it too is the part of the Whole. Neither is there a reason within Universe for relativity alone, out of its own force. Within its very self-alterations and differences are possible that is to say some minimal adjustment.

This minimal difference, which arises because of its commitment to its own determination, and it is neither non-committal and non-determined — it is simply a matter of symmetry.

The same, everything is the same, the only thing, all that stood on the Left is now on the Right. Or perhaps nothing, just so that something is different. Just so that SOMETHING SIMPLY MUST BE DIFFERENT. And just because there is no reason something is put into motion, or whatever — and changed. Only one Plus for example, instead of Minus; Plus in relation to something that has no reason — let alone a situation of the initial state or a particular direction — that Plus could be related to Up but then also to Down, but maybe also a Minus, and again we have ended up with RELATIVITY. Or, if this is a better expression: INERTIA. Or: SYMMETRY.

And what else?

Nothing, but with it everything, the entire Universe. Particularities and determinations must exist, because the World exists!

* * *

And this again is the initial fact: the World exists.

And more: particularities exist.

That however of itself, one with another within itself actually means a unified fact: Relativity exists.

And this is all. This is the point of beginning, this and nothing else should be sufficient to enable us to reach the final answer, the one about the fundamental question of philosophy — a reply or some clumsy solution, perhaps only an uncertain presentiment whatever, but something that would be adequately determined. And that is the contradiction: Something is anticipated because we always deal with something particular and somewhat determined, while on the other hand THERE IS NO REASON for nothing particular or determined. This is all we have from where we can possibly take off! And since this is all and since there is no reason, there can also be nothing, is it not so? Nothing at all! Or is this nothing also something determined, and that which is — is so only in relation to this or that something, its NEGATION so to speak. Nothing is that which could have been but IS NOT. And if this negative possibility forever remains one and the same, negation of every particularity and every determination, the nothing itself would become nothing else but AFFIRMATION — out of its passivity and indirectly a new particularity and determination. But for this surely there could be no reason, this if anything is Impossible. (It is impossible that general negation fails to promptly negate itself). And from this impossibility one simply has no escape but to leap headlong into motion and metamorphoses — and precisely that iron logic is the creative force of the entire Universe; something MUST OCCUR always and anew even without meaning and cause, that is to say COINCIDENTALLY, which already tomorrow may not be. This something which is ESSENTIAL is something else as well that is — it is not what it is or it is, but only by the way, within changes and tempests, so that in reality it is not. This is a true contradiction and no longer methodological but within the very subject. The very Universe is contradictory within itself. Precisely because it is the Universe (everything), and from within itself it draws its own contradictions: Not always Everything (not the Universe just like that), but always and anew this and that, something specific and individual. If then we have the particular at question, than we have again, so to say, a denunciation of Everything (a denunciation of the Universe Just like that). Still without the entire Universe we would have neither this nor that. And while Everything in the context of the Universe), is something undetermined, the particular on the other hand is something extremely determined, it is so to speak particular and determined. This contradiction is always and anew reconciled in the particular and determined, that is to say that which is POSSIBLE.

On one hand: that which is possible, first, second or various possibilities compose a new uncertainty (undetermined situation), and finally COMPLETE UN-DETERMINATION, THAT IS ALL­ENCOMPASSING POSSIBILITY, simply everything — THE ETERNITY ITSELF.

On the other hand: singular or Individual possibilities become that simply because they rely upon the particular and determined, upon the particularities themselves.

And here finally we find ourselves in a situation in which the very question of the existence of the Universe should no longer escape us. Before all — the existence? This is the condition that receives its stalwart reliability simply as one particular and determined existence. Only so does it have its beginning and its end, simply — its TIME. Particular and undetermined existence again — is the existence of mere possibilities. In this case it is more difficult to determine when it had begun, and when it had ended. Completely undetermined existence, not particular and not determined, is the same as non-existence: Just a GENERAL UNCOMMITTED POSSIBILITY — COMPLETELY UNDETERMINED SITUATION — out of time, and everywhere, and therefore also out of SPACE. It, therefore, needs no reason, it exists of itself: since time immemorial and forever, All­encompassing and always the same — simply ETERNITY. This only eternity, therefore, that is to say this undetermined endlessness, or an eternally undetermined situation which is, non-existence, i.e. the same as the completely undetermined existence, and consequently the same as the all-encompassing possibility — can not however remain as it is — just like that. Otherwise it would completely and surely transform into something else: into one and only possibility, into a commitment for a particular and determined non-affiliation — therefore something quite impossible — something with an end, something finite. Hence, within itself it contains not only the existence and non-existence in general, but all existence and disappearance in every detail, ail affiliation and every choice. Within the imminent difference (within itself) within one and the same and completely undetermined situation all the subsequent particular uncertainties are conceived and from here their various directions lead us to various possibilities — and with then finally all the particularities and determinations themselves. This extraction of the particular is, however, the result that in the following moment fails to be the same, in the absence of an undeniable cause, every particularity is only a temporary token (and nothing else) of all that that is possible. And so, always and only a token and a symbol — of a new particularity.

Hence the reply: The Universe, strictly speaking, does not exist, what exist are the transient particularities under various metamorphoses and within mutual interrelationship.

Or, on the contrary: The Universe exists, but just because nothing else does exist, except these particularities.

But: Could it be — that nothing else, just nothing else exists? Or perhaps its best to say: Neither does the Universe exist, nor does it not exist — what does exist however, are the changeable and transient particularities in a mutual Interrelationship.

However: The particularities themselves would not exist if this and such Universe did not exist. They themselves are therefore something that neither does or does not exist.

That is: Particularities do exist, but precisely because of that they are changeable and transient. The Universe does not exist as something determined, but exactly for this reason it has always been and forever will be the same.

Yes, that is the truth, that is the answer.

All that. That is all.



Eternity is therefore Eternity merely because it is totally undetermined, because in fact it just as mush is as it isn't, because it is — the first, the second, everything — and in this it remains undetermined. Eternity is simply in no way finite, in no way limited, without frontiers and therefore it is not determined in the Least. Otherwise every particular determination would in fact be a limitation, and a general determination about diminishing of determination would be superfluous and tautological. Thus for example, if it had already been said on the point d) that the primeval cause is eternal, and if on this everyone agrees, then it is no wonder that all sides agree on the points a), b) and c) as well. When something is eternal, i.e. completely undetermined, then it, considering that it is in no way determined, it is also in no way limited, — it is unlimited not only in space but also in time and in its manner as well. Sufficient are therefore the labels "from ever" and "for ever", sufficient is also that which refers to eternal metamorphosis, that is about the eternally new way and manner. Raving finally agreed under d) that the Primeval cause is eternal, the previous claim that it is from ever and for ever and in countless ways, even though accurate of course — they still retain only the importance of a historical momentum and trek by which people arrived at this common conclusion presented under item d). And no wonder, as we have said that all have agreed and do agree — providing the condition that is, that under Eternity we indeed comprehend ETERNITY, AND NOT JUST ORDINARY AND SOME SORT OF REPEATING, all in one direction and only according to the same attribute. And no wonder, however, is the fact that these same people from here on agree on nothing else. Because — they just cannot. Because — it is impossible.

(From the Chapter VI of PHILOSOPHY AND BELIEF,

translated by Nikola and Eldina Miscevic)

Back to Contents

Back to the First Page