13 Questions

[TheDarkestOfAngels]

The first cause had to be separate from the universe because nothing can bring itself into existence because it would have to exist and not-exist prior to its existence which violates the law of contradiction.

I would like to add to what the Reverend already stated about this 'infinate regression' based on an arguement you've made against me in regards to radioactive decay.
Which is to say that you've argued against the legitimacy of using radioactive decay based on 'we weren't there, therefore we couldn't possibly rely on estimates based on radioactive decay.

The arguement above is entirely invalid due to, well, evidence, but ignoring that for a moment, you have to realize just how hypocritical your argument for a 'first cause' is. You have zero evidence of any 'first cause' - particularly one started by an intelligent being and no human or even testable evidence would be around to validate your statements.

---

Thanks for the clarification on the first point. I disagree with you, but you explained your position well. I feel that the law of contradiction, law of identity, and etc would still exist even if all humans died out on earth, so I think they exist apart from humanity not because of it. Interesting topic though.

The laws of logic would exist independant of humans only if there were other beings that could use them. That is to say, they have a nuanced language the equal or better of humans.

As to your second point, maybe we are just missing each other on this one. When I say rational I mean having the ability to exercise reason, which is something animals and natural events do not possess. So my question is where did this ability come from? It seems that a person’s ability to discern truth is unrelated to survivability, so I do not believe Darwinian processes could explain how the rational mind arose. Any thoughts?

Storms and natural events do not have the ability to exercise reason. Animals other than humans can be another matter entirely, however.
I don't know what ability you're thinking of to answer your first question.
A person's ability to discern truth from fiction is intergal to survivability. In nature, creatures frequently use deception tactics to survive or hunt. For example, humans can get along very well in the wild if they can tell apart nearly identical berries where one is poisonous and the other is nutritious. Numerous animals have the ability to make similar discernments about their surroundings as well. Evolution has bred this constant arms race for millions of years and many of the creatures alive today are exceptionally talented in their ability to survive based on their ability to 'discern truth.'
So you might not believe it, but your view of nature is exceptionally skewed.