Jeffrey Grupp

Abstract atomism has its roots in Buddhist atomism, and it is a theory about what people would ordinary refer to as the most fundamental and basic level of reality. The basic level of reality consists of nonphysical philosophical atoms that do not obey the commonsense empirical laws of causation, but rather appear be behave in a way much more in accord with the probabilistic causal (or non-causal) behavior of the subatomic particles of the quantum domain, and of the chaos of the theoretical quantum foam. Abstract atomism is discussed in much more detail in the conclusion of my 2005 article published in IIJBS; this page is just to serve as a simple introduction to abstract atomism.

Abstract atomism involves point-sized philosophical atoms that are indistinguishable from one another, and that are nonphysical bits of energy that flash in and out of existence. In other words, they are nonphysical particles (hence the word "abstract"): they are not nonphysical in the way that some philosophers might believe a mind or number to be alleged to be nonphysical, but rather they are nonphysical merely because, I argue in an article, that they are ultimate building blocks that in no way can be considered physical items. If that is the case, it indicates that reality is not physical (if, that is, extreme reductionism and mereological nihilism are correct theories.) This is where abstract atomism has similarities to Buddhist atomism, and some significant differences to the Western philosophical atomistic theories of Democritus, Epicurus, Hobbes, Dalton, Newton, and so on. Also, abstract atomism involves the position that the philosophical atoms are entirely unconnected and unattached to one another. This is in line with many of the ancient theories of atomism, but not so much with the theories of atomism of contemporary philosophers. (Some contemporary philosophers call philosophical atoms 'simples'.)

Perhaps the primary feature of abstract atomism--the principle that makes it all work--surrounds the idea that there must be infinite (aleph1-many) philosophical point-sized abstract atoms that make up reality. If there is, then “reality must have replacing presents, where at each present reality consists of new instances of atoms.” (The Indian International Journal of Buddhist Studies  6, 2005, page 114) What this means is that the atoms cannot exist for more than an instant, and since these atoms make up ultimate reality then the nature of ultimate reality is to flash in and out of existence. For reasons I explain in my 2005 article, it is due to there being an ''infinitude'' of atoms that philosophical atoms vibrated in and out of existence at every instant. This is a very important conclusion to be found, due to the fact that the basic building blocks of physics are also viewed to more-or-less behave in this way, and abstract atomism may offer an account of why they do, in addition to explaining the violent momentary nature of the theoretical quantum foam.

This idea that there are infinite metaphysical point-sized atoms that make up reality might sound odd to some, since many scientists and philosophers assume that infinities cannot exist in nature (that is, infinite collections of objects cannot exist in nature) because infinities (seem to) involve paradoxical features. But this is little more than an assumption by these philosophers and scientists, because many scientific theories involve infinite collections of objects, and some of our most successful scientific theories require that there be groups of objects in nature that are infinite in number. A good example is Einstein's relativity, which only works if space is composed of points that are infinite in number. A more technical way to say this is to say that space is a continuous topological manifold.

Abstract atomism also depends on the theory of mereological nihilism being correct. Mereological nihilism is the standard position of many ancient atomists, such as Democritus of ancient Greece, Dharmakirti of ancient India, and it appears to be the position held by Kant in his transcendental idealism. It may also be the position found in quantum observational physics. But mereological nihilism is largely rejected by contemporary philosophers for the mere reason that it is in disagreement with ordinary empirical experience.