To admit probabilities as irreducible elements of our best picture of physical reality is to give a central role to negation, or more radically to non-being. However determined the law which defines the probability in question it must be finally be understood as proposing certain possibilities and then ruling them out. What is 'chosen' entails no problem since it is in being to just the same degree as the real conditions that preceded it, even if those conditions are no more than a value of a wave-function; it is what was not chosen, what was rejected, that is the problem - what had a kind of being and now has no kind of being. In order that there could be in effect a non-being, contradictory as this is, would seem at the least to require exactly some such structure. That is to say that if you wanted to create a reality in which non-being played an essential role the most economical way to do so would surely be by way of probabilities which of themselves evolved deterministically. That the scandal is the non-being of what is rejected goes some way to explain the appeal of something like many-worlds, which flatly denies the non-being of what is not. What is the feeling or intuition of being such that it can only be imagined as full, as having no truck with non-being? What is it that is refusing to be seen?