I propose that synchronicity may be one of the most important conditions that brings Being out of nothingness. It is an “organ of meaning” that brings about a continuity of life experiences, a sense of life purpose—and a guide to human destiny.
Conclusions
There is one final question to be addressed in this first essay on nothingness. And it is a very challenging question. Is everything I have said in this essay misdirected? Does the concept of nothingness continue to be elusive? Has it slipped through my fingers? Does my nothingness always contain “something”? Should I turn to the analytic tradition and find that nothingness is simply a specific state representing most of the universe, especially when the universe is carefully and minutely examined?
Don Howard addresses this fundamental question in the initial pages of his book (Before Being) (Howard, 2025, pp.10-11). I quote him extensively, because, like me, he is grappling with this elusive matter of nothingness (Howard, 2025, p. 10):
“We can define true nothingness. We can describe what it is not. We can use language to outline the edges of absence. But we cannot image it—not purely, not without smuggling something in. Every attempt conjures traces of being: some sense of space, some dim volume, some vantage point. We might picture a black expanse, an infinite fog, a blank screen with the brightness turned all the way down. But these are metaphors with the furniture stripped away. They still imply space, contrast, orientation. They still rest on the scaffolding of being.”
Howard might have to embrace a more analytic perspective. Perhaps he should consult with the folks from Vienna who focus on questions that have answers which can be empirically validated and those that are “metaphysical” (speculative/without answers that can be validated). However, he is moving beyond the bounds of empirical verification (which requires that something exists which can be measured and verified) (Howard, 2025, pp. 10-11):
“Even the idea of absence assumes a reference point: something that once was, or could be, or should be. The moment we say “nothing,” we have already imported the grammar of something. We cannot help it. We are creatures of relation, shaped by structure, encoded by time. Our minds are formed by difference and boundary. Even erasure only makes sense against a backdrop that allows something to be erased.”
