Home | Be a Christian | Devotionals | Join Us! | Forums | Rules | F.A.Q.


Go Back   Christian Forums > Society > Society > Philosophy
Register BlogsPrayersJobsArcade Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Philosophy The forum for the discussion and debate of general philosophy & epistemology

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 5th November 2009, 06:24 AM
Nooj's Avatar
Rejoice! Rejoice!

19 Gender: Male Faith: Atheist Party: AU-Democrats Country: Australia Member For 4 Years
 
Join Date: 9th January 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 2,478
Blessings: 37,069
Blog Entries: 12
Reps: 32,798,783,029,729 (power: 32,798,783,036)
Nooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond repute
Nooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond repute
The cosmological argument

This is the Kalam Cosmological argument:

1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause
2. The universe began to exist
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause

First of all, if the conclusion is true and the existence of the universe has a cause, it does not follow that the cause is God.

I don't accept the second premise, because the evidence doesn't support it.

And I'm not sure if the first premise is true.

It seems like a fairly limp argument to me. Am I missing something here?
__________________
Every thirty seconds, a child dies of malaria. For just $5, you can buy an insecticide-treated net that covers an entire family. The insecticide lasts for 4-5 years. Somewhere in the world, a child is dying from a preventable disease. It doesn't have to be this way. Google 'Against Malaria'.
Reply With Quote
Become a CF Site Supporter Today and Make These Ads Go Away!

  #2  
Old 5th November 2009, 08:50 AM
Orthodox Inquirer

Gender: Male Faith: Christian Member For 1 Years
 
Join Date: 24th May 2008
Posts: 2,717
Blessings: 43,481
Reps: 38,350,722,292,181 (power: 38,350,722,296)
Chesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond repute
Chesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond repute
The evidence doesn't support the second premise?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 5th November 2009, 10:00 AM
Nooj's Avatar
Rejoice! Rejoice!

19 Gender: Male Faith: Atheist Party: AU-Democrats Country: Australia Member For 4 Years
 
Join Date: 9th January 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 2,478
Blessings: 37,069
Blog Entries: 12
Reps: 32,798,783,029,729 (power: 32,798,783,036)
Nooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond repute
Nooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Chesterton View Post
The evidence doesn't support the second premise?
No, it doesn't.
__________________
Every thirty seconds, a child dies of malaria. For just $5, you can buy an insecticide-treated net that covers an entire family. The insecticide lasts for 4-5 years. Somewhere in the world, a child is dying from a preventable disease. It doesn't have to be this way. Google 'Against Malaria'.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 5th November 2009, 10:21 AM
Orthodox Inquirer

Gender: Male Faith: Christian Member For 1 Years
 
Join Date: 24th May 2008
Posts: 2,717
Blessings: 43,481
Reps: 38,350,722,292,181 (power: 38,350,722,296)
Chesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond repute
Chesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond repute
What evidence are we talking about, and what type of cosmology does it support? Virtually all scientists in the relevant fields say the evidence indicates the universe had a beginning.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 5th November 2009, 10:40 AM
Nooj's Avatar
Rejoice! Rejoice!

19 Gender: Male Faith: Atheist Party: AU-Democrats Country: Australia Member For 4 Years
 
Join Date: 9th January 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 2,478
Blessings: 37,069
Blog Entries: 12
Reps: 32,798,783,029,729 (power: 32,798,783,036)
Nooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond repute
Nooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Chesterton View Post
What evidence are we talking about, and what type of cosmology does it support? Virtually all scientists in the relevant fields say the evidence indicates the universe had a beginning.
Not really.

The Universe had an early period during which the Universe very rapidly expanded from its state as a singularity. This expansion is known as the Big Bang. But scientists don't know what came before that singularity, if such a question is meaningful at all.

It's still up in the air whether the Universe had a beginning.
__________________
Every thirty seconds, a child dies of malaria. For just $5, you can buy an insecticide-treated net that covers an entire family. The insecticide lasts for 4-5 years. Somewhere in the world, a child is dying from a preventable disease. It doesn't have to be this way. Google 'Against Malaria'.

Last edited by Nooj; 5th November 2009 at 10:47 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 5th November 2009, 11:15 AM
Orthodox Inquirer

Gender: Male Faith: Christian Member For 1 Years
 
Join Date: 24th May 2008
Posts: 2,717
Blessings: 43,481
Reps: 38,350,722,292,181 (power: 38,350,722,296)
Chesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond repute
Chesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond reputeChesterton has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Nooj View Post
Not really.

The Universe had an early period during which the Universe very rapidly expanded from its state as a singularity. This expansion is known as the Big Bang. But scientists don't know what came before that singularity, if such a question is meaningful at all.

It's still up in the air whether the Universe had a beginning.
But that expansion from singularity was the beginning of this universe. If you want to go beyond that you'll have to resort to religion or science fiction. The second premise is founded scientifically.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 5th November 2009, 11:19 AM
Nooj's Avatar
Rejoice! Rejoice!

19 Gender: Male Faith: Atheist Party: AU-Democrats Country: Australia Member For 4 Years
 
Join Date: 9th January 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 2,478
Blessings: 37,069
Blog Entries: 12
Reps: 32,798,783,029,729 (power: 32,798,783,036)
Nooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond repute
Nooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Chesterton View Post
But that expansion from singularity was the beginning of this universe.
By beginning, I mean:
The universe began to exist
The expansion may have been the 'beginning' of the Universe in the sense of an early, formative period but it's not known whether the Universe began to exist, which is another sense of the word 'beginning' and the one relevant to the Kalam cosmological argument.

Originally Posted by Chesterton View Post
The second premise is founded scientifically.
No, it isn't. Science is silent on the second premise for now.
__________________
Every thirty seconds, a child dies of malaria. For just $5, you can buy an insecticide-treated net that covers an entire family. The insecticide lasts for 4-5 years. Somewhere in the world, a child is dying from a preventable disease. It doesn't have to be this way. Google 'Against Malaria'.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 5th November 2009, 11:32 AM
Eudaimonist's Avatar
Legend

42 Gender: Male Faith: Atheist Party: US-Libertarian Country: Sweden Member For 5 Years Commander
View Profile Pic
 
Join Date: 1st January 2003
Location: Sweden
Posts: 13,007
Blessings: 79,979
My Mood Tired
Reps: 19,171,578,098,712 (power: 19,171,578,118)
Eudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond repute
Eudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond reputeEudaimonist has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Chesterton View Post
The evidence doesn't support the second premise?
Considering that it may be meaningless to speak of time outside of spacetime, then it would be equally meaningless to speak of the universe "starting to exist". At most, it would "start to change".

But I see a flaw in premise 1 as well. Causes are understood in terms of change, not in terms of "coming to exist". There is no causal theory of existence ex nihilo.


eudaimonia,

Mark
__________________
It's better to live as your own man
than as a fool in someone else's dream.
-- Commander Koenig, Space: 1999
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 5th November 2009, 11:47 AM
Dark_Lite's Avatar
Vatican Black Helicopter Commander

Faith: Catholic Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 15th February 2002
Posts: 6,360
Blessings: 62,365
Reps: 225,994,478,889,774 (power: 225,994,478,903)
Dark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond repute
Dark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond reputeDark_Lite has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Nooj View Post
Not really.

The Universe had an early period during which the Universe very rapidly expanded from its state as a singularity. This expansion is known as the Big Bang. But scientists don't know what came before that singularity, if such a question is meaningful at all.

It's still up in the air whether the Universe had a beginning.
Up in the air, perhaps. But the most obvious logical explanation that generally gets tacked on is that the Big Bang was "the beginning." And indeed it is "the beginning," as far as we know currently, of the universe as we know it. As for the beginning of existence, it is true that there are disputes about that: things like oscillatory universe, etc.

But the Big Bang is responsible for time, space, and the laws of nature as we know it. Before the Big Bang, anything could have been. The existence of the universe as it is known today is a direct result of the Big Bang, however. So, we can say the existence of our universe started with the Big Bang. Before that, what constitutes "the universe?" Is another universe shrinking into a singularity part of "our universe?" Or is it something else entirely? The realm before the Big Bang gets very vague about what constitutes "the universe."

I do find it interesting though that the only alternative to an ex nihilo start of the universe is an eternal universe... Or is there another alternative I'm not aware of?
__________________
Causing confusion one avatar at a time.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 5th November 2009, 12:05 PM
Nooj's Avatar
Rejoice! Rejoice!

19 Gender: Male Faith: Atheist Party: AU-Democrats Country: Australia Member For 4 Years
 
Join Date: 9th January 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 2,478
Blessings: 37,069
Blog Entries: 12
Reps: 32,798,783,029,729 (power: 32,798,783,036)
Nooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond repute
Nooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond reputeNooj has a reputation beyond repute
So, we can say the existence of our universe started with the Big Bang.
I'd rather say that the current state of our universe is attributable to the Big Bang.

Before that, what constitutes "the universe?" Is another universe shrinking into a singularity part of "our universe?" Or is it something else entirely? The realm before the Big Bang gets very vague about what constitutes "the universe."
I'd say the Universe before its Big Bang period was that which existed.
__________________
Every thirty seconds, a child dies of malaria. For just $5, you can buy an insecticide-treated net that covers an entire family. The insecticide lasts for 4-5 years. Somewhere in the world, a child is dying from a preventable disease. It doesn't have to be this way. Google 'Against Malaria'.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Return to Philosophy

Thread Tools
Display Modes



 
Become a CF Site Supporter Today and Make These Ads Go Away!
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:53 AM.


vBCredits v1.4 Copyright ©2007 - 2008, PixelFX Studios