Enai de a lukal
Well-Known Member
But that is non-sequitur; everything could be contingent, and have staggered terms such that every contingent object "relies on" the contingent object prior to it, extending back ad infinitum.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Extremes of Atheism vs Theism
- Thread starter idav
- Start date
That's one of the problems. It doesn't make sense for anything to have no beginning due to infinite regression. Maths are able to represent things not necessarily a reality.
Enai de a lukal
Well-Known Member
Why doesn't it make sense? Makes sense to me.
What is exactly your problem with infinite regression?
Philosophy, et cetera: Unchanging Time and the Infinite Past
Is Infinite Regress a Problem? | Intrinsically Knotted
Could an Infinite Series of Past Events
:
It is an argument for an efficient cause for everything. I am arguing that something can be the efficient cause of itself while others take out further to say there doesn't have to be an efficient cause for everything. It is logical that things can go back ad infinitum but it is hardly practicle and rather avoids the problem by pretending there isn't one.
It is an argument for an efficient cause for everything. I am arguing that something can be the efficient cause of itself while others take out further to say there doesn't have to be an efficient cause for everything. It is logical that things can go back ad infinitum but it is hardly practicle and rather avoids the problem by pretending there isn't one.
Enai de a lukal
Well-Known Member
What does that mean? Impractical how?
Whether it is something which can bring itself into existence or just some eternal thing that just exists, both qualify as god because it is a thing with great power and infinite creative potential capable of bringing about this and possibly other universes. Yes I would call that thing god no matter how you wanna spin the "beginning".
Enai de a lukal
Well-Known Member
But why suppose there is either sort of thing, given that both are not only intuitively implausible, but are the exact opposite of everything we've ever experienced?
How so? The something from nothing theory as explained in science is a version of bringing itself into existence or just eternally existing as virtually nothing. It isnt implausible there has to be an answer and saying god did it or this universe came from a previous universe are types of answers that cause infinite regress issue not really giving an answer to existence.
Enai de a lukal
Well-Known Member
Have you, or anyone else you're aware of, ever experienced something that is either self-caused or eternal?
Have you, or anyone else you're aware of, ever experienced something that is either self-caused or eternal?
We have all experienced eternity before we were born. Our perception shows us causes from our own beginning but inuitively there should be a beginning, one before anything we can fathom. So we expect there to be an ultimate exception to strings of events. Saying a universe caused a universe ad infinitum isnt something we can experience either.
No, actually the opposite. Imagine that you start counting minutes backwards. -1 minute, -2 minutes, -3 minutes, -4 minutes, -5 minutes and so on. But when you reach the -1 umptillionth minute suddenly you go "Here it starts! There is no -1 umptillionth and one minute! A god had to start with the -1 umptillionth minute!" Why!?
Not sure there was any preference. Everything would just start based on whatever its nature allows. If it was in the nature of existence to wait a trillion seconds then that's what it would do, naturally.No, actually the opposite. Imagine that you start counting minutes backwards. -1 minute, -2 minutes, -3 minutes, -4 minutes, -5 minutes and so on. But when you reach the -1 umptillionth minute suddenly you go "Here it starts! There is no -1 umptillionth and one minute! A god had to start with the -1 umptillionth minute!" Why!?
Sorry but that doesn't make any sense. Can you rephrase?
Simply put, whatever exists does so naturally.
Can't you just answer why there had to be a start at some -umptillionth minute and why there couldn't be a -1 umptillionth and one minute?
I don't think there is a reason or a why. I don't think it was some conscious entity twiddling his thumbs arbitrarily picking some random time to start everything. The point it that anything that exists will act within its nature. If its the nature to wait one more minute then so be it, if not then it couldn't be so.
If everything didn't exist yet then time or this conscious entity twiddling his thumbs didn't exist either.
If everything didn't exist.....then nothing exists. Yes I think this is true.
I will try to put it another way. Why are we a certain age and not a minute older or younger, because nature didn't allow it any other way.