The Cosmological Argument and Free Will

[orangebox21]

An eternal being fits the criteria of an 'uncaused first cause' and does have explanatory power.

It doesn't explain how he did it - therefore, no explanatory power.

'How' is irrelevant to the argument. Seeking to answer the question of what X caused Y is different than seeking to answer how X caused Y. These two questions can be answered independently of one another. The cosmological argument does not address the 'how', nor does it need to.


My proposition: If something exists it either began or always has existed.

Your propositions:
1. If something exists is was caused by a material cause, or
(it began)
2. If something exists it came into existence without a cause, or
(it began)
3. If something exists it has always existed, or
(it always existed)
4. If something exists the spatio-temporal concept of beginning doesn't apply to it.
(Given the universe includes time, space, and matter, the spatio-temporal concept of beginning does apply to it. It [the concept] would not apply before the universe.)

No false dichotomy.

And if you argue that it began to exist without a material cause, you must prove it as well.

It is 'proven' in the assertion that 'the universe began to exist with a material cause' leads to an infinite regress. If material caused the universe into existence, then what caused that material? If it was caused then it is not an uncaused first cause, and you're on your way to the infinite regress. If nothing caused it, then the material must be eternal. If material caused the universe into existence, the only logical conclusion is that the material is eternal.

Hang on - why would you assume that the causality principle is applicable to the beginning of the universe?

If you accept the premises: Everything that has a beginning has a cause and the universe has a beginning, then the causality principle would be applicable. To show the causality principle not applicable you would need to show either of these premises untrue.

But, being extremely generous and granting your baseless assertions - all we can say about the cause of the universe is that it is the material which transformed into the universe.

If what caused the universe is material which transformed into the universe, then what caused the material which was transformed into the universe? It's an infinite regress. You're back to choosing either an uncaused first cause, or eternal material.

You can't call it the "first cause" without proving that that is where the causality principle stops. And you certainly cannot assert any intelligence there.

If there is a first cause, then by definition this is where the causality principle stops.

Hello by the way.