|
Post by Caroline on Feb 17, 2017 15:26:35 GMT -5
1. If the universe began to exist, then the universe has a cause of its beginning. 2. The universe began to exist. 3. Therefore, the universe has a cause of its beginning. Philosopher William Lane Craig gives three supporting arguments for premise (1): - Something cannot come out of nothing.
- If something can come into being from nothing, then it becomes inexplicable why just anything and everything doesn't come into being from nothing.
- Common experience and scientific evidence confirm the truth of premise (1).
Support for premise (2) include philosophical arguments, i.e. an infinite number of things (past events) cannot exist, and numerous scientific evidences that support the standard Big Bang model for the beginning of the universe.
|
|
|
Post by Joe on Feb 20, 2017 20:12:10 GMT -5
Hi!
In order to conclude from this argument that the cause is God, you have to switch definitions of "cause" midstream. Yes, all things have a "cause" -- that is, something that results in that thing. But not all things have a Cause, in the sense of a purpose.
|
|
|
Post by Caroline on Feb 21, 2017 9:41:52 GMT -5
The argument is referring to an efficient cause…that something that produces the effect. I don’t understand in what way it requires one to “switch definitions of ‘cause’ midstream.”
|
|
joe
New Member
Posts: 11
|
Post by joe on Feb 21, 2017 20:26:49 GMT -5
I'm saying if you want to claim that this argument is evidence of God, you have to present "cause" as something more than simple cause-and-effect.
Of course if the universe began, there is a cause for that beginning. But that cause could be Brownian motion, or an errant thermonuclear bomb, or raspberry Jello. If you're using this argument as evidence of a divine being, it assumes that the universe has not just a cause but a purpose.
I understand the idea of a Prime Mover, but the trouble with this argument as evidence of a deity is that it assumes that the Prime Mover must be a conscious actor—but there's no logical connection there.
|
|
|
Post by Caroline on Feb 22, 2017 15:24:52 GMT -5
All your hypothetical causes require matter to exist first so could not qualify as a cause of the universe.
The argument does serve as evidence for a deity because as I said elsewhere, the cause must be immaterial, non-spatial, eternal, necessary, and incredibly powerful. And an intelligent, personal mind, which I gather is what you mean by “conscious actor.” The cause must have the capability to choose to bring about the effect or not, otherwise the effect would exist as long as the cause exists…in this case, eternally. And we have very good evidence that the universe is not eternal.
|
|
joe
New Member
Posts: 11
|
Post by joe on Mar 3, 2017 19:18:19 GMT -5
"All your hypothetical causes require matter to exist first so could not qualify as a cause of the universe."
No, they don't. You're confusing "universe" with "existence" or "reality." There's no logical grounds to conclude that there cannot be multiple universes, either prior to or concurrent to our own (or both), or indeed a construct larger and more comprehensive than our universe, within the broad realm of existence.
And again, there's no reason to assume a causal agent of the universe is intelligent, much less "personal."
|
|
|
Post by Caroline on Mar 3, 2017 21:26:10 GMT -5
There may not be “logical grounds” against the possibility of multiple universes, but there’s no evidence for them and positing such an extravagant explanation for the existence of the only universe we do have evidence for seems desperate. And even if there are multiple universes, you still need a cause.
Other cosmological models have been proposed to avoid a beginning of the universe, but according to cosmologist Alexander Vilenkin, “All the evidence we have says that the universe had a beginning.” [cited in “Why physicists can’t avoid a creation event,” by Lisa Grossman, New Scientist (January 11, 2012)]
And I gave the reasons why the causal agent must be intelligent and personal, by which I mean having a free will to choose to create or not create.
|
|