(November 27, 2018 at 8:39 am)Jörmungandr Wrote: 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.
^Exactly this. If you start with problematic axia, your conclusions end up being little more than wind-pissing.
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax