[Serious] Book reports

[Belacqua]

Just as there could be multiple "unmoved movers" instead of one, it seems like there could be multiple "uncaused causes" as well, each with its essence equal to its existence.

I don't know these things...

You've gone past what I can argue, because -- unsurprisingly -- my limits are reached pretty quickly. 

No doubt people have worked on this, and that if you're interested enough you can track down the arguments. It would be wildly conceited for any of us to think we'd identified the one unnoticed flaw in the argument that has been going on for millennia. That's not to say there are GOOD arguments -- obviously if I don't know them I can't judge them.

I can sketch how an objection to multiple movers might go...

First we have to get over the idea of the cause or mover as a demiurge. There certainly could be a pair or committee of demiurges. I think we're supposed to work backwards asking the question "and what is necessary for this to exist?" So we'd ask about the roomful of demiurges, "what is necessary for this group of things to exist?" (Because in Thomas "cause" means "that which is necessary for it to exist.") And the idea is that a roomful of demiurges would still require something more fundamental for their existence. And that this would end up being something like existence itself. And existence itself is singular -- everything that exists shares in existence. So for example if there were multiple movers occupying various niches in spacetime, it would mean that spacetime is (logically, not temporally) prior to them. Which would mean that they aren't the end of the chain, and therefore not the First. 

That's how I see it...

Personally I'm not in a hurry to conclude an answer. "Certainty is absurd," as the man said. I respect anyone who can look into this with genuine curiosity and dispassionate skepticism.