(August 12, 2020 at 6:10 pm)brewer Wrote: You call it an assertion, I call it a conclusion.
Please tell us the reasons you reached this conclusion.
The perceived motivation of the person making the argument is not a reason to call the argument flawed. That would be an ad hominem fallacy. Even badly motivated people may make logical arguments which are sound and valid.
The argument states that everything contingent depends for its existence on the existence of something else. For anything at all to exist, there must be existence. Therefore existence itself is not contingent on anything else. Therefore existence itself is the first cause.
The parts that are specific to a given religion require additional arguments, and are not included in the first cause argument, so please show the logical flaw you perceive in only the argument as stated.
