Disproving Odin - An Experiment in arguing with a theist with Theist logic

[SteveII]

Under any theory of time there is some sequence that is countable whether you call it causes/connection/light cones/changes in entropy/states of affairs/or whatever. I'll call it causal connections (but insert whatever you want).  Any timeline would show that the causal connections that created the present were preceded by causal connections which were preceded by causal connections for an infinite series in the prior-to direction. If you posit an infinite number of these causal connection going back, you have a problem. How could we have traversed through an infinite number of sequential causal connections to get to the one that caused the present (causal connection 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 0)? There will always have to be infinite more causal connections that still need to happen (on the front end). We will never arrive at the present.

You claim that under any theory of time there exists a set of causal relationships.  But then you go on to put forth descriptions and arguments which are necessarily tied to the A theory of time and so are not in fact applicable "under any theory of time."  Both you and Roady commit this same error.  Either way, you don't appear to have thought this through particularly well.  Perhaps there exists an argument to be made based upon the nature of causation but I'm inclined to believe that if there is, you do not possess it.

That's nit picking. Anyone can rewrite that with ambiguous B-theory-friendly terms. But at least you got a couple of Kudos from your fans. Glad I could help.

---

@steve, no one is obligated to offer defeaters to your premises.  It’s on you to demonstrate they are true, or more likely to be true than not.

First, that smells a little defeatist to me. 

Second, while it seems to me the premises are self evidence, I did offered in the very first post on the KCA which premises you wanted me to defend. Only Vulcan took me up on it. So...there's that...

Since I have the site open...