There exists nothing that is brute, inert, and unthinking, and instead there is a continuum of creatures that exist on a spectrum from highly intelligent and active to largely dim and dull.
If language cannot refer to non-linguistic things and events, either it cannot have the power to shape our classifications, descriptions, and evaluations of things and events experienced, or there exists nothing beyond language in which case we can abolish poverty, racism, and sexism by denying that those words have any meaning.
Hegel himself rejects this sort of doctrine —which he terms acosmism — and while it certainly amounts to a view that there exists nothing besides God, in view of its basic denial of the reality of the world we all experience it hardly seems like a kind of pantheism.
At its most general, pantheism may be understood positively as the view that God is identical with the cosmos, the view that there exists nothing which is outside of God, or else negatively as the rejection of any view that considers God as distinct from the universe.
In retrospect, however, it must be acknowledged that Descartes' classification of material substance with extension, as exemplified in his demand that there exists nothing in bodies except "certain dispositions of size, figure and motion", is so open-ended and equivocal as to easily accommodate both of the interpretations surveyed above.
"I wanted to create a better frosting because nothing out there existed.
I find it liberating to understand how everything is permissible not because the absence of God or Truth practically provides moral license for any and all action; instead, because everything expresses itself first as the potential for experience, there exists a "nothing" before actual things.
"Nothing out there exists".
Where there isn't anything existing nothing exists.
Nothing iscountable unless there exists a counter.
