Saturday, 08 October 2011 22:01

Science Is Telling Us That We Are Nothing

Written by 

This paper points out that science carries an implicit philosophy, the philosophy that human beings came from nothing hence are nothing.  On the other hand, human beings are those creatures that must see themselves as worthwhile for them to work to provide for their lives; if they are worthless, why should they work to support those worthless selves; therefore, teaching that they are lacking in value, as science does, is a disincentive to human productivity. Perhaps, there is another aspect of people that transcends their bodies hence has worth?

Science Is Telling Us That We Are Nothing

Ozodi Thomas Osuji

Science is telling us something about us and we do not seem to get it, and if we get it do not seem to want to accept it; it is telling us that we came from nothing, will return to nothing and, therefore, are nothing. Those who came from nothing are nothing.

The fundamental message of science to mankind is that we, human beings, are nothing; that we are not special at all and that our ideas about our specialness are a delusion. We came from nothing and will return to nothing and are therefore nothing.

This is the philosophy that science has been teaching us since Nicolas Copernicus published his book in 1543 and hypothesized that the earth is not the center of the universe and that the sun is; a hypothesis that in 1609 Galileo proved is true by using his telescope to show that the sun is the center of the solar system; a hypothesis further demonstrated as true in 1687 when Isaac Newton published his seminal book positing the three laws of motion and his theory of gravitation.

Science has been on a quest to devalue human beings, to show that they are not the creation of some God who loves them and that they do not live in a world that is especially made and placed in the center of the universe.

Science has shown that we live on a planet (earth) along with eight other planets orbiting a medium sized star, the sun. Our sun is a star in the tail end of a spiral galaxy (Milky Way), a galaxy that contains billions of other stars, and a galaxy that is one of billions of other galaxies.

Science is showing us that we are not special at all; it is telling us that we are nothing. Science is bent on humbling human beings, bringing them down from their self-exalted position.

Thirteen point seven (13.7) billion years ago, contemporary cosmology teaches us, nothingness transformed itself into some-thingness. Out of nothing something appeared; what that something is we do not know. That something is said to be as small as a particle (that is, smaller than an atom). It is said to be very dense. Whatever it was it got infinitely hot (heat energy is introduced) and exploded. In its explosion light particles were formed (Light energy is introduced). The explosion invented space and time and into that space was poured in the just invented particles of light; space, time and photons expanded at a speed greater than the speed of light, Alan Gutt’s inflation hypothesis teaches. (The movement of matter invented mechanical energy; the Big Bang explosion apparently was done in sound hence invented sound energy).

The Big Bang produced particles of light, photons; those combined to form sub-atomic particles called quarks. Quarks combined to form protons and neutrons (apparently, photons formed electrons directly without the intermediacy of quarks).  Protons and neutrons combined to form nuclei of the lightest atoms, hydrogen and helium. All these were done within a second!

Electrons were eventually captured by nuclei; electrons circled nuclei to form atoms (beginning with the lightest atoms, hydrogen, helium etc.).

The laws of physics suggest that the Big Bang should have produced equal number of particles of matter and particles of anti-matter (such as anti-electrons, positrons; anti-protons, anti-neutrons, anti-atoms, anti-hydrogen etc.); matter and anti-matter should have attacked each other and annihilated each other, and returned matter to pure energy (radiation) and thus ended the nascent universe from coming into existence. Apparently, this expected event was averted by an accident whereby for every billion particles of anti-matter invented one billion and one particles of matter were invented, thus when matter and anti-matter attacked each other some matter survived to continue the evolution of the material universe.

Science talks a lot about accidents; it explains the coming into being of new phenomenon as a result of accidents, randomness and chance. This causal approach to phenomena seems useful for it prevents the tendency of mankind to attribute new occurrences to the agency of God.

God is probably the invention of our imaginations. We made God in our image and turned around and said that God created us in his image. Having posited what we call God we said that God did this or did that. There is no empirical evidence that God exists or that he did anything in this world. Thus, one accepts science’s tendency to attribute the origin of what we cannot yet account for to accident. One, however, believes that in time we shall be able to explain those things without attributing them to chance.

Many of the accidents currently attributed to what is generally referred to as anthropoid principle may have different explanations. The anthropoid principle holds that it seems that the universe had the specific purpose of inventing a universe that produced human beings. In other words, the universe is teleological; it had a goal of producing human beings. This kind of gives human beings the impression that they are special for it means that the universe was specifically designed to produce them.

Some of the accidental occurrences that made the existence of human beings possible include the presence of more matter than anti-matter; the fact that the early universe expanded  at a speed greater than the speed of light, 186, 000 miles per second, to prevent the collapse of the universe  unto itself hence averting the existence of the universe; the asymmetry that occurred when the cloud of emergent hydrogen gas produced spaces between itself and the clumps of gases was pulled by gravity into themselves  and in their cores nuclear fusion started (ignition); that is, hydrogen atoms fused to form helium atoms, and stars are born.

Nucleosynthesis inside stars produces new elements, elements all the way to iron where it apparently stops for the heat required to produce heavier elements does not exist inside stars. In addition to producing new elements nuclear synthesis produces heat and light, energy that work its way from the interior of stars to their surface and finally escape. The heat and light that reaches us on planet earth from the sun (taking eight minutes to traverse the 93 million miles separating us from the sun) helps make life possible on planet earth.

The early death of the original massive stars, death in supernovae, produced sufficient heat to fuse elements heavier than iron, such as uranium, gold, diamond; elements that eventually accreted to form planets and planets that produced plants and animals, human beings included.  The eventual production of an atmosphere on planet earth with less carbon dioxide and more oxygen that made it possible for animals to evolve on planet earth.

In the 1990s it was accepted that the universe appears to be expanding at a rapid rate; the question was: what is causing this massive expansion and what is preventing the galaxies from flying apart. Scientists posited the existence of dark matter and dark energy.

It is now said that twenty three percent of the universe is made of dark matter and that seventy three percent of the universe is made of dark energy. Dark matter helps gravity in keeping the galaxies where they are and prevent them from collapsing into each other while dark energy is responsible for the rapid expansion of the universe.

The implication of dark matter and dark energy is that ninety six percent of the universe is made of stuff that we do not yet understand; only four percent of matter and energy is visible to us. So what is that 96% part of the universe that we do not understand?  Is that dark stuff playing a role in the existence of human beings existence?

400, 000 years after the Big Bang, the universe of plasma (cloud of unattached nuclei, electrons and photons) cooled down somewhat. In cooling down electrons were able to attach to nuclei and thus formed the first atoms, hydrogen and helium. Thus, the universe became a cloud of hydrogen, helium and lithium.

Apparently, initially this gaseous cloud was symmetric; that is, was the same everywhere and there was no space in it.  Eventually, however, asymmetry occurred: space emerged between clumps of gas. With space between clumps of gas gravity came into play. Gravity pulled the emergent clumps of hydrogen unto themselves until they ignited into stars. Stars are nuclear factories where hydrogen is fused into helium and thus produce heat and light energy.

Apparently, the original stars were massive in size. Those massive stars quickly burned out their hydrogen; they did so in millions, not billions of years.  They expanded and exploded in supernovae. During the explosion incredible heat is generated and that leads to the invention of heavier than iron elements. The elements are showered into space.

In time the elements showered into space accrete to form smaller sized stars (such as our sun, a medium sized star) and the planets.

It is said that our sun was formed four and half billion years ago and that its nine planets were formed at the same time.

Planet earth, apparently, came into being when clouds of gas and dust were accreted. Initially, a small rock like object was formed (called planetismal). This small rock attracted other rocks and debris floating in space. Gravity kept on pulling matter to the emergent planet until it grew to the size we now know it to be.

The original planet earth was very hot.  But, apparently, comets carrying dust and frozen water kept on striking the hot earth and in time cooled off its surface and produced the waters we now have on earth. The earth’s surface is covered by 70% water.

Gravity pulled heavier elements into the inside of the earth. Thus, the core of the earth is made of solid iron and nickel; the outer core is made of molten iron and nickel and above that is a viscous rocky mantle. On top of the mantle is the earth’s crust, the part we live on.

The earth is covered by an atmosphere with many layers, an atmosphere that gradually tapers into cold space. In the atmosphere are many gases including nitrogen, oxygen, carbon etc. and those make the existence of biological organisms possible on earth.

On earth and in space atoms combined to form molecules (water, for example, is a molecule made of two atoms of hydrogen and one atom of oxygen). In time molecules combined to form the basis of biological organisms.

Human beings evolved from atoms and did so over a long period of time. The current estimate is that human beings began to evolve apart from gorillas and chimpanzees about seven million years ago. Homo erectus was discernible 2 million years ago. About fifty thousand years ago what is now called human beings, Homo sapiens, came into being.  Apparently, they originally evolved in Africa and then spread into the Eurasian land mass and eventually to North and South America and Australia.

The current ideas on the future of the universe (based on Friedman and Hubble’s discoveries) are that it is expanding. At some point in the future the expansion would put enormous space between the galaxies; stars would be separated by long distances between them. This would lead to heat loss and resultant excess cold in the universe. The result would be that stars would die.

The dying process of stars is that they exhaust their energy supply (mostly hydrogen) and start fusing heavier elements (all the way to iron) and eventually expand and explode in supernova. During the explosion the enormous heat generated leads to the invention of heavier elements. The core of exploding stars collapse into themselves and form white dwarfs (in the case of medium stars like the sun) or neutron stars (here all the particles in the atom: protons, electrons and neutrons are compressed into neutrons; the neutron stars rotate rather rapidly) and black holes (here the core of the star is so dense that not even light could escape from it).

The stars will eventually decay into the various elements and the elements would in time decay to the various particles. Electrons and neutrons would decay to quarks and photons and the hardiest particle of them all, protons, in time, also would decay into quarks and photons.

In trillions of years in the future all matter would decay into photons, that is, energy, what they came from. Photons would then decay into the nothingness from which they were produced during the big bang explosion.  The universe would die a cold death, with no matter and energy in it.

The alternative explanation of how the universe would die, called the big crunch, says that all matter would collapse into themselves; this idea is now discarded. The generally accepted idea on how the universe would die is that it would die a cold death and the universe would be one empty space with nothing in it.

Some speculate that perhaps the resulting empty universe would compress itself into another singularity and explode in another Big Bang and give rise to another universe.  This is called the rebound hypothesis.

There are other hypotheses, such M (brane), the idea that our universe is a branch off from another universe.

Super strings hypothesis, using quantum mechanics, speculates that there are infinite universes, each occupying the same space but unaware of others existence due to the fact that it operates under different dimensions. Our three dimensional universe would not know anything about a five dimensional universe that exists where we are.

There are many speculations on multiverse but the significant point is that our universe is in the future scheduled to die. Science teaches that we came from nothing and would end in nothing.


In the meantime we defend our bodies with food, clothes, medications, shelters etc. and in defending them make them exist for a while (each person could live up to one hundred years before he dies, decays and returns to the nothingness from whence he came).

We have laws, courts, judges, police, governments, military etc. with which we defend our bodies and in defending them make them exist for us, make them real to us.  Governments protect the people’s bodies; if bodies are nothing they are protecting nothing; and if bodies do not exist they are protecting what does not exist.

Law courts and judges defend good people and punish bad people and in so doing make people’s egos seem very important; they give false sense of worth to bodies.

Law and governments, police etc. exist to protect nothing, yet they must do so for that is what the world exists to do, to protect nothing, and in so doing make nothingness, body, seem important

Defense makes our bodies exist for a while; then our bodies’ age and die and return to the nothingness from whence they came. All we are doing is defending temporary agglomeration of particles, atoms and molecules and in defending them make them exist for a temporary time frame.

We value our bodies otherwise we would not defend them with food, clothing, medications and shelter; we literally slave to obtain what serves the needs of our bodies. Alas, the bodies that we are very proud of, that we work very hard to keep alive eventually die, decay and return to the elements that make them up and eventually those decay to particles and those in time decay to the nothingness from whence they emanated during the big bang. From nothingness to nothingness is our story.

Science tells us that our bodies literally came from nothing and will return to nothing. When you are walking down a street and you are looking at people, bodies, walking by you, you are literally looking at bodies that came from nothing.  Those bodies are nothing.

When a human body dies, it decays and the elements that composed it (nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, carbon, potassium, magnesium, phosphorous, calcium etc.) dissolve. If you cremate the human body you reduce it to a few pounds of ashes. Those ashes have no monetary value. Literally one’s body has no monetary value!

If the human body is cremated the ashes liquefied and the liquid is heated it transforms into gas (mostly nitrogen, oxygen, carbon, calcium, hydrogen, potassium, magnesium, sulfur, phosphor, iron and other trace elements) which can be further reduced to particles (neutrons, protons and electrons). The particles subjected to more heat are reduced to photons and eventually to nothingness. The human body is literally nothing!

Since the human body came from nothing and returns to nothing it does not exist, or it can be said to have temporary existence (during the one hundred years or so human beings live). This is very humbling to the human ego and pride.

Science has dealt a deadly blow to human self-worth, especially those aspects of it that is based on imaginary sense of importance. Consider white racists claim of superiority to other races. In the past five hundred years the amazing discoveries of the West gave some white folks the impression that somehow they are superior to those other human beings who are not as materially developed as they are, especially black folks. Thus, many white folks fancy themselves superior human beings; they look down on black folks and see them as inferior human beings.

Adolf Hitler was so convinced of the superiority of his Germanic people that he justified going to war to annihilate those that to him seemed inferior to Germans (based on his perception of their less contribution to science and technology). He wanted to wipe out the Slavic people of Eastern Europe, African people and other groups he believed were primitive.

But here comes science telling us that we came from nothing, are nothing and will return to nothing.  Furthermore, science tells us that all mankind originated in Africa and that the last great migration out of Africa occurred only fifty thousand years ago, that is to say that all human beings were once Africans.

Science tells us that the advancement of certain groups relative to others can be fully explained by environmental factors. Jared Diamond, in his seminal book, Guns, Germs and Steel made that claim regarding the evolution of human societies.

Evolution biology tells us that human beings are only three percent different from chimpanzees. That is correct; we are almost the same as chimpanzees!  That must be a blow to our pride in specialness.

Among human beings evolution biology says that there is less than one percent biological differences among them.  The various races are not that much different from each other. This must have struck a blow to the pride of racists.

But racists are not defeated; their pride is not yet ready to die. Those with delusion of grandeur seldom give up. Thus, racists rallied and tell us that if only three percent of difference exists between human beings and chimpanzees and human beings have mounted civilizations which chimpanzees have not done that that means the one percent difference between the races can fully account for differences in their accomplishments.

The presumed one percent difference between blacks and whites, they say, can fully account for the differences in the level of attainment of blacks and whites in civilization. In other words, white folks are superior to black folks albeit by one percent.

Delusion disorder, the root of racism, is systematic belief in what is not true as true and efforts made to convince other people that the untrue is the truth. Thus, deluded racists with their need to seem superior and special human beings will not give up; they struggle on trying to demonstrate their imaginary specialness.

Racist white psychologists test black folk’s intelligence on IQ tests that they (white folks) designed; they say that there is fifteen points difference in the average score of white and black folk; they use the fifteen point’s difference in the average scores between blacks and whites as evidence that whites are superior to black folks.

Let it be noted that the average Asian scores fifteen points above the average white person and by the racists’ logic Asians are superior to white folks!

Obviously, white racists are not willing to accept the hypothesis that Asians are smarter than whites and look to the Confucian culture of East Asia that emphasized disciple and study as accounting for the different scores of whites and Asians. In other words, they employ cultural factors to account for why Asians do better than white folks on intelligence and standardized tests, such as the SAT.

If they are willing to do so one wonders why they are not willing to accept that the different scores of average blacks and whites is also due to environmental factors.

But they would not accept the equality of people for that would destroy their need to seem special in a universe that treats them no better than it treats mosquitos. Looking at Africans objective primitive status they conclude that Africans are incapable of mounting human civilization and do not want to be like Africans. They fear “degenerating” to African levels and oppose racial mixing for they think that the progeny of such mixing would degenerate to the level of Africans, become primitive; they believe that mixing the races would lower white folks from their supposed exalted status.

Given the backwardness of Africans it is understandable why other people do not want to be like Africans. Human beings are motivated to improve their lot and do not like to be like primitive people. Human beings desire upward mobility and fear retrogression; that desire and fear notwithstanding the fact is that the science of biology shows that all human beings are the same.

If anyone needed evidence of human sameness and equality he ought to see how the presumed primitive Africans are quickly caching up with the so-called civilized Europeans in everything.  It is true that at present Europe is five hundred years ahead of Africa in science and technology but there is no doubt that that gap will be bridged in about a two hundred years. The gap is already being bridged between Europe and Asia.  In many areas, Asia is now doing better than Europe. Come two hundred years and Africa will do as well as other continents.

The salient point is that science has dealt a deadly blow to human pride: science has demonstrated that human beings are nothing.

Science is actually giving us a philosophy, a view that we are nothing. We buy this perspective on humanity without much thinking.

Our old time philosophers and theologians have been marginalized by ascendant and triumphant scientists. Scientists are now the philosophers of the world! The philosophy they teach is that we came from nothing and return to nothing and that we are nothing.

Much of the resistance to science is actually based on the perception that science is humiliating human beings. When Galileo insisted that the earth is not the center of the universe the Catholic inquisition wanted to have him recant that view or else he would be killed; he recanted and was sentenced to house arrest and told not to say any more that the earth is not special.  In 1859 Charles Darwin published his book, Origin of Species, in which he claimed that human beings are just another breed of animals, animals that evolved from single celled organisms to multicellular organisms; that we are just a more complex monkey (because our brain structure somehow can think and wrote Shakespeare). This was a blow to human sense of specialness and some church persons went on a war path and tried to either discredit Darwin or prevent the teaching of evolution in schools. To the present some persons are still struggling to prevent teaching evolution at schools or want it taught along with their ideas on a designer God that intelligently designed human beings and presumably made them special beings.

Science is perceived as denigrating human beings, lowering them from the exalted position they had hitherto placed themselves and human pride does not like that one bit. Thus, people are fighting back; they are trying to discredit science and reassert human worth.

In their struggle to assert humanity’s worth and value they want to resurrect what traditionally was used to give human beings worth: belief in God.

Religion, among other things, is a belief system that attempts to present human beings as special creation and as having worth. Religion gives its believers a sense of worth and value, meaning and purpose in their existence, whereas science tends to give folks the impression that they are worthless, valueless and live meaningless and purposeless existence.

People would like to believe that they have worth and value and that they live meaningful and purposeful existence; they apparently do not want to see their bodies as just a bunch of elements, atoms and particles that are temporarily held together by chemical bonds, bonds that will age and breakdown and the elements  decay and leave the human body.

To the extent that religious people would accept that their bodies will die they imagine that their God would resurrect them in glorified bodies (Jesus Christ was allegedly resurrected in a glorified body), bodies that do not know corruption,  bodies that would not die and decay and smell worse than feces.

People will perform any mental trick to convince themselves that the bodies they live to slave for have worth; they simply refuse to accept the evidence of science that their bodies are nothing that temporarily seem like something, and do so for only as long as they are defended with food, medications, clothes, shelter etc.

It appears that human beings must have delusion of worth and religion and its God hypothesis plays into that delusion.  Richard Dawkins, the atheist evolution biologist, says that belief in God is a delusion, a mental disorder, a belief in what is not true as true because that delusion serves a purpose for people:  gives them a sense of worth, a sense of worth they desperately desire to have.

Delusion disorder requires the victim to ignore the evidence of empirical science so as maintain his sense of superiority and specialness.

But facts are stubborn and speak for themselves. Science shows what is self-evident: that the human body is made of matter and that human beings live in the world of space and time, and that that world of matter, space and time came from nothingness and in trillions of years to come will return to nothingness.


One may ask: what is nothingness?  Nothing means no- thing, not any particular thing; not a particular thing may mean everything. That is to say that nothingness means everything.

To say that the universe came from nothing is to say that it came from everything; to say that the universe returns to nothing is to say that it returns to everything.

The universe is nothing means that the universe is everything!

Whether our prides and egos like what science is telling us about ourselves or not the fact is that most rational persons appreciate the good that science has done for mankind.  Look back in time and see the difference that science has made in our lives in the past five hundred years since the Western world embraced science as a methodological approach to phenomena. Before Copernicus (the Greeks had some science: Democritus propounded the idea of atom) human beings lived in darkness about the nature of their world. They saw natural elements, such as the sun and the other planets (such as mercury, Jupiter, Neptune, Uranus etc.) as gods. Diseases that we now know are caused by germs (bacteria, fungus and virus) were attributed to the agency of the gods. The gods were worshipped and propitiated with the hope that they would cure the physically sick. They did not cure any one; human beings lived and died early. Life span for those who survived the diseases of infancy was less than forty years.

The belief in Jesus Christ, among other factors, was probably predicated on the perception that he was a healer, a great medicine man who waved a magic wand and cured the sick and resurrected the dead from death.

The world was a primitive place before science came along. Now, see the improvements that science has made in our lives. Think about cars, trains, airplanes, televisions, telephones (especially wireless telephones) and the internet. What science has done to improve our lives is incalculable. Therefore, no reasonable person would want to place obstacles on the path of science.

If science in five hundred years was able to do this much to improve our lives, and it has only began the journey of understanding how natural phenomena works (we, perhaps, understand one percent of how the universe is put together) just imagine what the future would look like. In the next five hundred years, if science is not prevented from explaining how the world works, science and technology (applied science) would transform this world into what folks used to imagine as the abode of the gods, heaven.

Simply stated, we must continue the scientific endeavor for it is perhaps the best thing we have done in our sojourn on planet earth.

In a billion years the sun will begin its dying process, have less hydrogen to burn and begin to expand, incorporate mercury and Venus and heat up the earth and dry up its waters; the earth would be less habitable for biological lives. If science is left to do its thing perhaps by then we would have the technological ability to travel to other planets, and even to other galaxies and locate planets that we can live on.

Indeed, if there are other universes, as the concept of multiverses posit, we could be able to wormhole our way to some of them and live there when our universe becomes too cold for matter to be in it.  Science is our only hope for living in the future (one assumes that we did not destroy ourselves with the weapons of mass destruction that science and technology enables us to develop).

Yet this great marvelous thing called science makes us feel like we are nothing!  Human beings do not want to feel like they are nothing. Therefore, we must deal with this effect of science, the feeling that we are nothing.

Are we really nothing or is it only the case that it is our bodies that are nothing. There is no doubt whatsoever that our bodies are nothing (they came from matter and return to matter, matter came from nothingness during the beginning).


If you are an acute observer of human behaviors you probably have noticed that people are engaged in a game; the game is: we are important, see and treat us as important persons.

Everywhere people sense their lack of importance and compensate with efforts to seem important.  They feel like they are nothing but want to be seen as something important. The men go to war and conquer other men and in so doing seem important (these days they go into business and amass wealth and eventually political power and that makes them seem important).

Women feel like they are nothing and put fancy clothes, jewelry, shoes, perfumes and other expensive things on their bodies, things that beautify their bodies and in so doing hope to seem important in their eyes and in other people’s eyes.  They want to be treated as important persons and for their bodies to be valued by those who see them. They want men to value their sexual organs, their vaginas even though men generally see those as filthy and smelly things but play the game of we are important and not tell women about how awful their sexual organs smell.

Society is a game of: “tell me that I am important and I tell you that you are important”. If you do not play this game and treat a person as if he is unimportant he would hate you, do things to make you suffer, even kill you. If you are smart, you should not tell another person that he is unimportant for if you do you have disobeyed the rules of the game of we are important, and by doing so other men feel perfectly justified to kill you.

You must play the game of importance for people to get along with you.

Nevertheless, the shrewd observer knows that people are unimportant no matter what they do. A few bullets into people’s heads and they are dead and their much valued bodies smell worse than shit.  Thus, the astute observer watch people’s dance of “we are important” with amusement for he knows that it is a waste of time; people are not important and no matter what they do will never be important; they are whited sepulchers.

There should be no illusions about the nature of the human body.  The human body has absolutely no worth. If any person decides to end one’s life he or she can do so; you can put a bullet into one’s body and in six minutes one dies. Hitler decided that he liked to kill people and killed over fifty million people. No higher power, such as God, stopped him from killing people; only those who wanted to live, those he attacked, Russians, counter attacked and eventually killed him hence stopped him from killing people.

Dictators all over the world decide to kill people and do so without any higher power stopping them. Terrorists, be they individuals or governments, decide that since people are prone to fear that they can intimidate them into doing whatever they want them to do. Thus, they randomly kill a few persons and in so doing get many people to live in fear of what could happen to their lives so that they do as the terrorists asked them to do so as to avoid being killed.

In our lives we know that diseases of all sorts attack our bodies and make mincemeat of them until they are killed by our immune systems or the medications we take.

Earthquakes, volcanos, tsunamis, draughts, tornadoes, hurricanes and other natural disasters kill people as if they are nothing. Simply stated, empirical evidence shows that the human body has no existential worth as far as nature is concerned.


The philosophy of science, the finding that our bodies came from nothing and are nothing, has depressed mankind.

Neurosis largely emanates from the awareness that one’s body is nothing and that people’s bodies are nothing, and that bodies may not even exist. The neurotic is excruciating aware of his and human beings’ nothingness. The awareness that he is nothing and that people are nothing depresses the neurotic.  The neurotic then reacts with an effort to seem like he is something important.

The neurotic uses his imagination to construe a self-concept and a self-image that makes him seem important and special and defends that fantasy important self. The racist neurotic, aka deluded paranoid personality feels utterly worthless, rejects that feeling and compensates with grandiose sense of worth, a worth that now is based on feeling superior to other persons.   The paranoid neurotic makes efforts to make his imaginary big self-seem to exist; he seeks attention for his imaginary important self; the more other people seem to pay attention to his imaginary big self that self seems real.  Seeking attention from other people, who in reality do not exist, makes the neurotic’s ego that does not exist, seem to exist. These efforts keep the neurotic unaware of his real self, which is nothing.

Science tells people that their bodies are nothing and that their minds emanate from their nothing bodies.  This is reality, science says.

But some people see this reality as depressing and do not want to accept it. They posit ideals and religions, ideas on God that make them seem important. Ideals and ideas about God are assumptions, unproved ideas. They are wishful thinking, magical thinking; wished for states that are not so in reality. They are delusional. Delusion is refusal to accept reality as it is.

Delusion emanates from perception of reality as not good enough; rejecting it and positing an alternative ideal reality that one wished were real but is not real.

The deluded, paranoid person rejects reality, rejects his real self (which is nothing) and posits an imaginary wished for self (that is very important) and aspires to becoming it and in the process is not dealing with the real self (which is nothing) and the reality of his world (nothingness). He is in fantasy land, he has checked out of reality.

To say that there is heaven, life after death is delusional because no one has demonstrated that they in fact exist. The mentally healthy person accepts what is real (nothingness), accepts reality and does not give in to wishful thinking (that the world be ideal and perfect).

Science tells people that they are nothing and that they should accept that reality and that any other thing is wishful thinking hence delusional.

You are nothing. Consider that anyone could kill you when he wants to do so. Therefore, construct governments and laws and law enforcement agencies to protect your body to live the one hundred years nature designed your body to live and die.

Science is depressing and at the same time exhilarating.

To be depressed means that one had had ideals of one ’s self and then feel disappointed not living up to those imaginary ideals. If one accepted reality as it is one would not be depressed.

Depression and delusion go hand in hand for both entail inability to accept reality (albeit it ugly) as it is; both result from wishful thinking. Disappointed ideals lead to depression and effort to deny that feeling via positing further ideal, perfect selves lead to paranoia


Science has humbled human beings by reminding them of their littleness and eventual nothingness. I think that the rational person should accept this feedback from science and live with it; he already felt that way anyway. Who could look at the immensity of the universe and his pony self and not conclude that he is of no significance in the scheme of things. Thus, rational persons accept their insignificance and live with it.

On the other hand, there are human beings who, for some reasons, would like to deny their littleness and nothingness. These are the people who deny the evidence of their perception and the feedback of science. These people use their imaginations to invent idealistic, grandiose self-concepts for themselves. They feel little and compensate with grandiose big selves.

In the process of trying to become their desired but imaginary big selves these people develop delusion disorder and the other mental disorders that has delusion in it (such as schizophrenia, paranoid type, Mania and its delusions etc.).

The reality of the human condition belittles human beings (for human beings are those creatures who, apparently, want to be important) and that depresses them and some of them try to run away from their reality by inventing the various mental disorders.

Clearly, denying reality is not rational; folks simply have to accept that they are little and, ultimately, nothing; they have to live with that reality.

One has to accept that one is nothing. Thereafter perhaps one explores religion to see if in fact there is an aspect of us that transcends the feedback of science (our nothingness) and then embrace it. I explore mysticism with the objective of seeing if what those who have had mystical experience say about a different reality are true. Nevertheless, I am rooted in the reality of the here and now that shows me that my body is nothing.

Those who have experienced mysticism tell us that there is another side to human beings that is not made of matter, space and time. They tell us of a world of oneness and perfect unity, a world where all beings are one; a world where there are infinite selves but all of whom know themselves as one self; a world where one self ends and another begins is nowhere; a world where there is no you and I, no seeing for there is no other selves to see; a joined world where there is perfect peace and happiness. It is said that in that world one knows everything there is to know, feels eternal and peaceful. (See Evelyn Underhill, Mysticism; William James, Varieties of Religious Experience; Morris Buck, Cosmic consciousness; M. The Gospel of Ramakrishna; Helen Schucman, A course in miracles.  These books explain the mystical, union, experience.)

Are mystics psychotic persons indulging in fantasy or is there some truth, albeit unknown truth, in what they say?

Is the philosophy of materialism, the belief that all is matter, that our minds are products of matter hence die with the death of our bodies, true?  I do not have the answer to these questions. Do you have the answers to these questions; answers that can be proved following the scientific method (observation, verification, replication, falsification etc.). If you do…I am not interested in unsubstantiated opinion or religion affirmed on faith…, please share it with us.

Read 2018 times
Ozodi Osuji Ph.D

Ozodi Thomas Osuji is from Imo State, Nigeria. He obtained his PhD from UCLA. He taught at a couple of Universities and decided to go back to school and study psychology. Thereafter, he worked in the mental health field and was the Executive Director of two mental health agencies. He subsequently left the mental health environment with the goal of being less influenced by others perspectives, so as to be able to think for himself and synthesize Western, Asian and African perspectives on phenomena. Dr Osuji’s goal is to provide us with a unique perspective, one that is not strictly Western or African but a synthesis of both. Dr Osuji teaches, writes and consults on leadership, management, politics, psychology and religions. Dr Osuji is married and has three children; he lives at Anchorage, Alaska, USA.

He can be reached at: (907) 310-8176