JuliaL
The argument is that no matter how much we extend states of the universe, even if we assume it's of infinite states in the past, we come to the notion it had to begin to exist, because each state of it began to exist, and all of it's states therefore began to exist, therefore it makes no sense to say it didn't begin to exist....therefore assuming it's of infinite past will just make us realize it's a paradox....which points to a beginning of universe.
However to state we can't go back before the first point of time, and hence, for all we know, this doesn't require a cause, is really the special pleading, because it didn't always exist either and began.
From what I read, for example, Stephen Hawkins would argue "there is no more north to the north pole" and hence we don't need to concern ourselves with what is before the first point of time even though we know the universe began both through philosophical and scientific argument (he argues science confirms philosophy in this respect). However, I feel that is the real special pleading. Just because it's the first state of the universe, it doesn't mean we don't know that it began to exist. And just because there is no going back before beginning of time, doesn't mean we can't know it requires a cause as it to began to exist. Therefore this is the real special pleading.
I think Stephen Hawkins changed his view over the years maybe, I don't know, but I have "brief history of time" in my room.
The argument is that no matter how much we extend states of the universe, even if we assume it's of infinite states in the past, we come to the notion it had to begin to exist, because each state of it began to exist, and all of it's states therefore began to exist, therefore it makes no sense to say it didn't begin to exist....therefore assuming it's of infinite past will just make us realize it's a paradox....which points to a beginning of universe.
However to state we can't go back before the first point of time, and hence, for all we know, this doesn't require a cause, is really the special pleading, because it didn't always exist either and began.
From what I read, for example, Stephen Hawkins would argue "there is no more north to the north pole" and hence we don't need to concern ourselves with what is before the first point of time even though we know the universe began both through philosophical and scientific argument (he argues science confirms philosophy in this respect). However, I feel that is the real special pleading. Just because it's the first state of the universe, it doesn't mean we don't know that it began to exist. And just because there is no going back before beginning of time, doesn't mean we can't know it requires a cause as it to began to exist. Therefore this is the real special pleading.
I think Stephen Hawkins changed his view over the years maybe, I don't know, but I have "brief history of time" in my room.
