How to debunk the first cause argument without trying too hard

[Ronkonkoma]

Sure Boss, Math is definitely abstract, and uses abstractions but that does not give or take from the question of whether it actually exists or not. Did Einstein actually invent e=mc2? Or did he only recognize it? Are abstractions created by our brains, or recognized by our brains?

Oh... that slippery slippery slope where abstract ideas become things that actually exist... Where does it end?
Harry Potter?
Darth Vader?
Flying Spaghetti Monster?

Is a water wave something that exists? Or is it just water (let's assume water exists) with a particular coherent behavior which we've come to designate "wave"?

And speaking of the brain, we know precious little about what a thought IS. We may very well be like little kids standing in front of a radio set thinking the sound is coming from a small midget inside. Actually, the radio only registers the radio waves, but in order to know that, we have to know about radio waves. In terms of the brain, we don't have that basic knowledge know what a thought is. Values, longing for justice, a sense of purpose in life, freedom, personhood, human rights, responsibilities... are these all produced by our brains? How about collective values? Are they all produced by a giant mega-brain of many humans? Or are they only recognized and sensed?

Knowing you know little about a given thing should give you the hint required to withdraw judgement, until more accurate information is available.
Unless you want to just speculate... feel free, but be aware that any speculation is just that. Its bearing on reality is usually very slim.

You're right, fantasy is also an abstraction but there is a big difference between the fantasy of a schizophrenic and the fantasy of a famous movie producer. The difference is a basis on reality. I hate harry potter, but they say the book has values incorporated in them. So do the greatest literary works in history. They are an alchemy of human desire, of a purpotrator and a victim, of a human problem to be overcome. The book I just bought my nephews talks about forgiveness between two brother squirrels who grew apart. The theme is forgiveness. the values are brotherhood/solidarity/humility. These values can be actualized in the present. Once they are actualized by our behavior, they can never be undone because the past can't be undone. Darth Vader? "I am your father" - your long lost father you never knew; Paternity in a culture where kids grow up estranged from their parents. The flying spaghety monster? I have no Idea, I hear it refrained by Atheists.

-- Is a water wave something that exists? Or is it just water (let's assume water exists) with a particular coherent behavior which we've come to designate "wave"?
-- I think we named waves as such because they exists.

-- Knowing you know little about a given thing should give you the hint required to withdraw judgement, until more accurate information is available.
Unless you want to just speculate... feel free, but be aware that any speculation is just that. Its bearing on reality is usually very slim.
-- Speculation should be done by neuroscientists, psychiatrists, psychologists, and philosophers who are competent. I just go on living my day and read a book or two by them once in a  while. We are all midgets standing on the shoulders of giants.

---

You can say that the Big Bang is the limit of our knowledge. I guess that's acceptable. But other evidence for the existence of God is the immensely huge improbability of life forming on earth given the  number of conditions that all need add up to make it possible.. Estimated that there are around 320 of these conditions, with each of their probabilities to be "just right" to support life and prevent the earth to implode, being less than 1%. Adding all of them up gives a probability for there to be life on earth at a staggering 10 to the power of 23. AllThat in a small window of time!

The fine tuning argument? oh boy... -.-'
How can anyone attribute such probabilities when their sample size is ONE?
hint: they can't - they're making it up - they're supposing things they can't suppose - the argument is flawed at the get go.
But thanks for playing.

I'm not playing. The sample size is said to be many by the string theorists. But there is no evidence that quantum mechanics applies to the macro-world. Some think this is because of gravity.

---

The rule E=mc^2 probably doesn't exist as an abstract entity anyway because it is probably not exact. It will break down at some point, will become part of something more complicated quantum-space-whatevery.

Take Newton's law of Gravity F = G m M/r^2

In the 19th century you could have thought this is a law of nature that somewhere sits in idea space as an actually existing abstract thingy. Today we know that it is an approximate property of curved spacetime, and thinking that it by itself was some kind of abstract entity with its own room in idea town would seem silly in retrospect. There is no reason why the same shouldn't be true for every single basic physical "law"

Suppose we are both looking at a cylinder. I'm looking at a cylinder form the side, and you're looking at it from the bottom. I see a square in two dimensions, and from the opposite side you see a two dimensional circle. They are both imperfect abstractions of the same cylinder. Just because they are parts of something bigger doesn't mean the square and circle don't exist.