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

[GrandizerII]

You're talking about the sound waves and words on paper, or the abstract parts? Be clear on what you're referring to here when you say "Anna Karenina" or "Fifth Symphony".



I'm sure there are problems with the argument; this is because we're going along with outdated notions of causality/movement. As such, your "efficient cause" argument is problematic in various ways as well.

---

But concrete/material objects do require material causes (according to human intuition, at least). If the universe is considered to be material and concrete, then Aristotelian-based logic necessitates that it has always been because it couldn't have had a material cause external to it.

If, however, the universe is an abstract collective of material things, then it seems like it doesn't need a material cause after all. It just is, and always has been (in one form or another).

EDIT: One could also argue abstract objects that begin to exist have their "material cause" in the mind itself. Or that abstract objects emerge from the material objects that they are linked to.

No, one can't argue that. The novel or symphony is not made out of the same material as the brain or paper. They have not material cause. Only efficient causes. You are not arguing with me on some sort of interpretation. You are arguing with established definitions. 

Requiring material objects to exist is just a feature of our universe.

Abstract objects are mental/mind-based, so one could argue that they have a material cause in the "mind material". But it doesn't matter either way, because material objects that begin to exist must require material causes (per the outdated Aristotelian logic). And even Aristotle himself argued that the universe/world must be eternal. In fact, the argument I presented earlier is virtually the same as the argument presented by Aristotle.