RE: "Everything has a cause and an explanation" discussion.
February 18, 2015 at 6:41 pm
(This post was last modified: February 18, 2015 at 6:46 pm by Pyrrho.)
(February 18, 2015 at 6:33 pm)Alex K Wrote:(February 18, 2015 at 5:40 pm)Pyrrho Wrote:(February 18, 2015 at 4:13 pm)Alex K Wrote: No by default. Show me otherwise
I would not go as far as that, but until a reason is given to think that everything does have a cause, and everything does have an explanation, there is no reason to believe that everything has a cause, and everything has an explanation.
How does this differ from my position?
If one says "no" to the question, "Does everything have an explanation?", that means that not everything has an explanation. Likewise, if one says "no" to the question, "Does everything have a cause?", that means that not everything has a cause.
I am suggesting that one refrain from either saying "yes" or "no" until evidence is presented. (Which, of course, I do not expect to be forthcoming, but that is another matter.)
We can liken this to the question, "Is there a god?" There is a difference between affirming that there is no god, and refraining from making a judgment about the question.
This was somewhat elaborated in the part of my post you omitted when quoting:
(February 18, 2015 at 5:40 pm)Pyrrho Wrote: ... With an absence of evidence, the most sensible position is to withhold judgement, and neither affirm that they are true, nor that they are false. And as others have observed, the questions themselves are less than perfectly clear, so it is entirely possible that we could be led in different directions with different interpretations.
I rather doubt we are going to see any proof of either proposition appearing in this thread any time soon.
"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence."
— David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Part I.
