Here Goes Nothing

Subtraction arguments (SAs) support the view that there might have been nothing. The best-developed SA to date, due to David Efird and Tom Stoneham, is claimed by its authors to entail that there are worlds in which there are space-time points but no concrete objects: Efird and Stoneham hold that space-time points are not concrete and that a world made up from them alone contains nothing concrete. In this paper it is argued that whole space-times are concrete and subtractable, so that a subtraction argument commits us to a bolder conclusion: namely, that there are worlds in which there is no space-time (and nothing else concrete). This result has far-reaching consequences: it supports the view that there might have been no time; and constrains accounts of possible worlds. In the course of developing this revised subtraction argument, I counter suggestions (made by Ross Cameron, amongst others) that SAs are question-begging.