Necessary Thing

[robvalue]

OK, we're getting closer. What difference does it make whether there is an infinite number?

I just covered the next post with respect to logic.

You're suggesting that if the existence of A depends on the existence of B, it's "more fundamental". I don't see this as being meaningful. All that is happening is that if B no longer exists, for whatever reason, then A will no longer exist either. And the same the other way round. There doesn't have to be an ordering for this to be the case. As a visual example, imagine object A and object B are balanced on some scales. If either of them is removed, the other one "falls". Neither is more fundamental than the other. This is an analogy, not a literal representation. So the continued balance of A does depend on itself still being there, yes.

We could easily construct a circular dependency on a set of infinite objects, yes.

If you object to circular contingencies, then:

You could have an infinite set x1, x2, ... so that xN is contingent upon xN+1.