Since the first cause need not be a god, the proof is an example of ignoratio elenchi, at minimum. It is not a proof of the existence of God.
There are other problems, but that is sufficient. This is simply the basic first cause argument fleshed out with formalism. Hardly worth even bringing up.
There are other problems, but that is sufficient. This is simply the basic first cause argument fleshed out with formalism. Hardly worth even bringing up.
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)