The video below explores this question. I thought it was pretty interesting.
In this video from the interview series Closer to Truth, the US presenter Robert Lawrence Kuhn and the UK philosopher A C Grayling peel back the layers of a question that’s been bandied about in many a Philosophy 101 classroom – ‘Why is there something instead of nothing?’ With Kuhn defending the question as a legitimate line of enquiry, and Grayling arguing that the question is ‘strictly meaningless, and for that reason unanswerable’, their discussion launches into a compelling exploration of logic and language, and the ways they intertwine.
We are living in a time when science has provided explanations to many of the questions that religious believers used to argue could only be answered by appeals to gods, creating what came to be known as ‘the god of the gaps’. I have noticed that believers now focus heavily on the question of why there is something instead of nothing as their ultimate backstop. Of course their preferred answer that something requires the existence of a god is a non-answer.
Comedian Robin Ince discusses the evolution of creationist ideas as science has closed successive gaps.