(July 6, 2012 at 1:36 pm)CliveStaples Wrote:(July 6, 2012 at 1:32 pm)ktulu Wrote: KCA is question begging "the cause", the conclusion is not sound. It's a bout as flawed an argument as they come.
How is it question-begging? It seems to be in a logically valid form:
1. For all x in X, P(x) --> Q(x).
2. P(y), where y is in X;
3. Therefore, Q(y).
Well, it is question begging because premise 1 breaks all things down into things that begin to exist, and things that do not begin to exist. In order for the argument to not be question begging, the subset of things that do not begin to exist needs more elements other then "THE CAUSE". Otherwise your argument becomes:
1. Everything that begins to exist, except for THE CAUSE has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist (due to THE CAUSE)
3. Therefore the universe has THE CAUSE.
I can kick KCA around more if you want to in a different thread, I don't want to douchjack this thread.