Sentience

[Captain Scarlet]

That is the same assertion. Complexity is not defined as a compounding of simple things over time, it is usually defined as a composite of interrelated parts. Can you prove that there are no composites that form spontaneously or have always existed? That is what you are required to do if you assert that definition of complexity.

Spontaneously isn't a problem as its still causal. If complexity has always existed, then it would not be complex, as things are only complex by reference to simpler forms. Sentience is more complex than non-sentience, thus as it is contingent it needs a cause. This is confirmed by all emperical observation and reality.

You still can't show that awareness is necessarily a causal sequence, all you can say is that we only know of awareness coming about through causal sequence. You still have the black swan fallacy, you've just dumped a layer of obfuscation upon it.A sequence refers to the change over a dimension (in this case time), not the aggregate of the change. You might want to rephrase this because at the moment I can only guess what you mean.

I mean that it is both a causal chain and an aggreagtion of that chain. Sentience is not an irreducible primary as it can be broken down into pre-existing concepts. Thus it depends on prior truths and is therefore coningent and therefore needs a cuase.

I'm not aware of any requirement in theism that he not be causal, William Lane Craig's theology makes God subject to time once he created it, so he goes from an acausal being to a causally influenced one.

But what does this mean?, how can an atemporal god be concious, act, think, plan, do, cause? A rough sketch is required to show how this god can do the things claimed if he is atemporal. Otherwise its special pleading for a 'magic man' who can escape contingency yet still be sentient and concious. PS I'm not qasking you to provide one, I don't think WLC has.

Your black swan has risen again. You can only maintain that assertion as it relates to physical beings, the definition of God as an uncaused sentience necessitates that the constraints on sentience in physical things do not apply. You again are implying that because our experience/understanding of sentience is x there cannot be sentience y.

So I didn't mention physical beings, just beings. Sentience is a quality of an extant being. Excluding a god from this is special pleading