Unger states an argument that ordinary things such as pieces of furniture, rocks, and planets, all do not exist. I will formally reconstruct and explain Unger’s argument for the conclusion that stones do not exists by presenting it with numbered premises and conclusions. I will then explain how Unger’s argument is supposed to work as well as critically assess Unger’s argument by bringing up an objection. Unger makes several different points in order to support his argument that stones do not exist. I have formulated an argument in order to support Unger’s argument and conclude how stones do not exist. 1. If stones exist, each is composed of a finite number of atoms. 2. When we remove an atom from the stone, the stone still exists. 3. When we continue to remove more atoms, we are left with a stone with zero atoms. 4. If each stone is composed of a finite number of atoms, then all space with zero atoms consist of stones. 5. All empty space does not consist of stones. 6. Therefore, stones do not exist.

To go even further, I can add another step in order to conclude that ordinary objects do not exist. The additional step would be that if ordinary objects exist, then stones must also exist. Therefore, ordinary objects do not exist. First we must see what objects exists and what objects occupy a position in space and time. Objects in the universe include planets, people, atoms, chairs, and the sun. They are all made out of parts and they are all composite objects. In order to explain the idea of composition we can say that the x’s compose a composite object if and only if the x’s, taken together have a function that none of them have separately, the x’s are physically bonded, and the x’s are inseparable. Nihilism supports Unger’s idea that stones do not exist because nihilism supports the idea that composition never occurs and therefore,