RE: The Best Logique Evidence of God Existence
July 16, 2019 at 9:41 am
(This post was last modified: July 16, 2019 at 10:19 am by vulcanlogician.)
(July 13, 2019 at 9:33 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote:(July 13, 2019 at 9:21 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote: Yes. That is a perfectly valid way of approaching the PSR. Things that exist, exist because they must exist. It is necessary for them to exist.
I think that’s where my head is these days as far as philosophical positions go. It seems to me that there could never be nothing. That sentence itself is a logical contradiction. Even the word “nothingness” is an attempt to describe some thing. We try to hold a vague concept of “nothing” in our minds, but the second we attempt to use language to explain what nothing “is”, we’ve already defined it into existence. Anytime we use language like, “nothing instead of something” or “nothing is”, or, “if there was nothing”, we are talking, tacitly, about something. This is why I think that existence is necessary. I apologize in advance if none of that makes any sense, lol.
It makes all kinds of sense. Nothingness is indeed something and (assuming such an absurd thing were possible) if nothingness existed rather than something, we could then ask, "Why does nothingness exist rather than something-ness?"
(July 13, 2019 at 11:46 pm)polymath257 Wrote: And I see the problem as assuming there is a *cause* for everything to exist. Since, for example, any cause must exist prior to causing anything else to exist, there is ultimately no cause for why things exist.
To me, it is a matter to be investigated. The ultimate cause of reality (if there is such a thing) may be well beyond what any scientific theory can express. And even if there were a theory robust enough to describe it, we may never be able to see far enough over the cosmic horizon to confirm such a theory.
But, hey, maybe it's something we can figure out some day.
Wrested from the hands of theists who like to use it for their god-of-gaps projects, the PSR is actually a decent assumption (axiomatic principle) upon which to form conclusions about nature.