- Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
- The universe began to exist.
- The universe must have a cause.
It has always struck me as odd to talk about things that begin to exist without some experience of things that don’t begin to exist.
For example, the statement “all crows that are black have wings,” doesn’t have any more meaning than the statement “all crows have wings.” The statement seems to imply that wingedness has some connection to blackness, but unless we have some experience or knowledge of white crows, we have no reason to talk about “crows that are black” rather than simply “crows.” We are better off saying simply can say that all crows are black and have wings because it doesn’t imply any dependence of one characteristic on the other.
By the same token, if we have no knowledge or experience of things that don’t begin to exist, what basis do we have for thinking that there is some connection between beginning to exist and causedness. Our knowledge and experience at best warrants the inference that all things have causes.
I often wonder why skeptics don’t have clever little syllogisms like the Kalam argument. How about this one:
- By knowledge and experience, we know that all things that exist have a beginning.
- God has no beginning.
- God does not exist.
Or for agnostics like me:
- Everything whose existence is objectively knowable has a beginning.
- God has no beginning.
- God is not objectively knowable.
Posts
"what basis do we have for thinking that there is some connection between beginning to exist and causedness"
ReplyDeleteSo now you're proposing that there are effects with no cause?
"we know that all things that exist have a beginning"
Logically, the regression must stop at some point. There must be an uncaused start to the process.
It's not exactly a syllogism, but it's worth keeping in mind:
Something must be eternal (or, uncaused).
The universe isn't it.
I am saying that I have no knowledge or experience of anything that has no beginning and I have no way to say what characteristics it might have. Therefore, there is no real difference between saying that everything that begins has a cause and saying that everything has a cause.
ReplyDeleteIf everything that exists has a beginning, then there is no regression. The regression problem only arises in the Kalamic argument.
You are correct. It is not a syllogism. It is just an assertion.
In any case, why does logic require the regression to stop? Mathematics is logical and it deals with infinite series quite well.
ReplyDeleteIn any case, how does substituting an infinite being for an infinite regression constitute a solution to the logical problem of something that has no beginning?
"If everything that exists has a beginning, then there is no regression."
ReplyDeleteHuh? That is exactly what creates the regression.
If the universe was created by something that was created, that was created by something that was created, that was created by something that was created ... Everything being created by something else, if it never ends, means the process never starts.
"Mathematics ... deals with infinite series quite well."
Infinite in expanse is not infinite in time. It is also simply an abstraction.
"how does substituting an infinite being for an infinite regression constitute a solution to the logical problem of something that has no beginning?"
Because the eternal being ends the infinite regression.
Most of what we are talking about here is abstractions. A being with no beginning is an abstraction. A regression of causes with no first cause is an abstraction. Infinite numbers and infinite series in mathematics are abstractions.
ReplyDeleteMy syllogism is superior though because it requires less abstraction than the Kalmic argument.
Humans do not have the cognitive capacity to actually comprehend "infinity". It's like a fourth spatial dimension or nonexistence. Our minds have evolved functionally, to deal with the real-world problems we face. So, I wonder how anyone hopes to be able to understand God, an infinite, non corporeal, omnipotent entity.
ReplyDelete