uncaused causes

[KCfromNC]

If you will share with us your view on how the universe began we would be delighted.

Because the fact that it did begin at some point in the distant past is an accepted scientific fact.

This is a simplification bordering on a falsehood.

So enlighten us as to how this took place.

You don't have to know what time it is to know if a clock is broken. Likewise, we don't have to know everything to reject a poor non-explanation for the origin of the universe.

 

[toLiJC]

there are several uncaused or strictly speaking endlessly existing things, and they are: God and His truth/righteousness, the souls and the uncaused substance(the "water" in Genesis 1:2), the universe as a space, the time as a constant period/duration.....

 

[Received]

In defense of the existence of a (generic) god we often hear the argument that an "uncaused cause/unmoved mover" is necessary as an explanation for the existence of the physical world.
Leaving aside for a moment all the weaknesses of this argument:
Is there a good reason to assume that there´s only one single such "unmoved mover/uncaused cause" - i.e. would the validity of this argument really make a case for monotheism?

Regardless of the subject, whether we're talking about a grand metaphysical "causeless cause," or simply the first cause in a string of any regular occurrence we can think of, the reductio ad absurdum argument against an infinite regress applies: an infinite number of causes would imply an infinite past; because an infinite past would never allow a present moment, there cannot be an infinite past and therefore an infinite number of precedent causes. So, there is a first cause by logical definition; where the quibbles come in is what can count as this "first cause."

 

[Dave Ellis]

The philosophy of science does.

No, not really....

 

[Dave Ellis]

It has been shown logically, philosophically, and scientifically that the universe had a beginning at some point in the distant past Therefore the universe is caused. If you dont believe me, read Stephen Hawking.

Therefore your application of the Razor to proposition one is useless.

If you had actually read Stephen Hawking, you'll also be aware he does not believe in God, and has his explanations for how the universe came to be using the laws of physics as we know them.

 

[Dave Ellis]

I will use logic with you Mr. Ellis, I hope you will be able to understand it. I shall make it simple.

Can something come from nothing?

What does that matter?

I haven't made that argument, so stop with the straw-men.

 

[quatona]

Can something come from nothing?

Within the universe? Apparently not. Outside the natural laws observed within the universe - I don´t know.

As soon as you come up with an explanation for the existence of the universe that is in line with our observations within the universe, I will accept your objection as valid. Else I will file it under "singling out one particular option because of it exceptionality that it has in common with all other options, including the ones you offer".

E.g.:
Do we observe stuff to be eternal within the universe? (Apparently not)
Do we observe the "spiritual" to create matter within the universe? (Apparently not)

 

[Elioenai26]

Im done speaking with people here on the subject of whether God exists or not.

If you're fine with living with a naturalistic worldview and all that it entails, then good.

For me it really does not matter what another person believes in. Let each man be convinced in his own heart. I know that when I die, I am going to be with my Lord and Savior in paradise.

I would like to encourage every other Christian who may be posting in this thread to continue to defend the Faith in love, meekness, and all humility.

If anyone wants to speak with me in private, I shall be delighted to via private message.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

In defense of the existence of a (generic) god we often hear the argument that an "uncaused cause/unmoved mover" is necessary as an explanation for the existence of the physical world.
Leaving aside for a moment all the weaknesses of this argument:
Is there a good reason to assume that there´s only one single such "unmoved mover/uncaused cause" - i.e. would the validity of this argument really make a case for monotheism?

I don't think it makes a good case for anything. The argument appeals to common notions of cause and effect, but it also frequently breaks those notions. In the world, we see that an effect is not unlike its cause. By that I mean matter acts on matter, so the billiard ball moves across the pool table when it is hit by the cue. However, in most versions of the cosmological argument, its proponents speculate on the nature of the cause as something radically different from its effect. The cause is believed to be supernatural, not composed of natural matter, but retaining intelligence and personality none-the-less. It's a supernatural cause completely unlike its natural effect (the universe).

 

[Eudaimonist]

Im done speaking with people here on the subject of whether God exists or not.

If you're fine with living with a naturalistic worldview and all that it entails, then good.

Note how we share something in common: we are fine with living with our respective worldviews.

This doesn't mean that we can't have philosophical discussions. Rather, it means that we shouldn't have such discussions attached to the goal that we are going to "convert" others, but perhaps instead to learn about others and why they hold their views. Just a thought.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Davian]

Im done speaking with people here on the subject of whether God exists or not.

If you're fine with living with a naturalistic worldview and all that it entails, then good.

You never did ask if I was fine with it. However, whether I am or not does not factor in to acceptance or rejection of others' assertions.

For me it really does not matter what another person believes in. Let each man be convinced in his own heart. I know that when I die, I am going to be with my Lord and Savior in paradise.

How do you know this?

I would like to encourage every other Christian who may be posting in this thread to continue to defend the Faith in love, meekness, and all humility.

That would be nice, but they will probably continue as they have been doing it.

If anyone wants to speak with me in private, I shall be delighted to via private message.

 

[quatona]

Im done speaking with people here on the subject of whether God exists or not.

This isn´t the topic of this thread, anyway.

 

[variant]

Are you telling me that you maintain that the universe is uncaused?

I want to make sure I understand what you are saying before I proceed any further.

I am saying something (at least one thing) is uncaused in the uncaused cause argument (which of course defeats it's first premise).

And, I am saying it is less absurd to say the universe is uncaused then saying the universe is caused by an uncaused God (via occams razor).

I am not one to buy into the "everything needs a cause" argument in the first place, I am just logically showing you why it isn't sufficiant to prove your point (or even reasonably demonstrate it).

If you use the same standards, you can not declair that God dosen't require a cause without conceeding that the universe may not require one.

 

[variant]

Variant, im going to need you to really pay attention here.

"Nothing" is not our focus. We are not concerned with the metaphysical properties of "nothing" for "nothing" is a concept or idea used in the thesis which states that nothing comes from nothing I.e. ex nihilo nihil fit.

It is extremely important. If there is no nothing to come out of then something certianly can not come from nothing and:

Saying the Universe comes from nothing is therefore an absurd argument becasue there was never a nothing.

In asking the question: can something come from nothing, the answer is either yes or no.

Don't make this harder than what it is. It is quite simple.

It's not simple at all. If the universe dosen't come from nothing because nothing dosen't exist, then, there is a certian complication to the problem.

I have no justification that a nothing can or does exist anywhere.

 

[Elioenai26]

It is extremely important. If there is no nothing to come out of then something certianly can not come from nothing and:

Saying the Universe comes from nothing is therefore an absurd argument becasue there was never a nothing.



It's not simple at all. If the universe dosen't come from nothing because nothing dosen't exist, then, there is a certian complication to the problem.

I have no justification that a nothing can or does exist anywhere.

Bingo!

 

[variant]

Bingo!

I'm glad you're happy but nothing I say lends credence to any of your points.

There may not be "nothing". Therefore.... ?

 

[Elioenai26]

I'm glad you're happy but nothing I say lends credence to any of your points.

It just means that we, as reasonable people, understand that something cannot come from nothing.

 

[variant]

It just means that we, as reasonable people, understand that something cannot come from nothing.

I didn't say that. I said nothing may not exist.

 

[Elioenai26]

I didn't say that. I said nothing may not exist.

LOL. Ok ok.

This is a philosophical thesis.

1. From nothing, nothing comes,
2. something cannot come from nothing,
3. nothing cannot produce something.

They are all different ways of saying the same thing.

For example, have you ever seen a horse appear into thin air from nothing?

 

[variant]

LOL. Ok ok.

This is a philosophical thesis.

1. From nothing, nothing comes,
2. something cannot come from nothing,
3. nothing cannot produce something.

They are all different ways of saying the same thing.

For example, have you ever seen a horse appear into thin air from nothing?

I've never seen a "nothing". I think it is misstating of the problem we are addressing.

The difference here is the universe being preceeded with a "nothing" which is a state of existence I am unfamiliar with, as opposed to say, a timeless singularity (which I am also unfamiliar with) as opposed to a timeless deity (which is also unfamiliar).