[Serious] Thomism: Then & Now

[Belacqua]

@Belacqua that was a great explanation. However, the clock, criminal haircut, and sun examples all seem to be different from one another.

Thank you! 

Yes, in trying to talk metaphysics with physical analogies, nothing is going to be 100% right. I guess we sort of have to abstract the principle from the analogy...?

First, the clock gears are not actually turning simultaeously. It just seems like that in our time scale. In the physical world nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. Imagine a fantastic series of gears in outer space that is a light-year long. It would take a minimum of one year before turning the first gear would result in the furthest gear's movement.

Well, in the normal-sized clock example they are turning together, I think. And then in the actual argument for a First Cause, we're not talking physical motion. So large distances don't really enter into it. We're talking existence of something, which is simultaneously supported by the existence of something else. 

The clock example of simultaneous motion is just intended to represent how an essential causal chain will require the constant action of all its "upstream" members. This is to differentiate it from an accidental chain, where the causes may wander off and leave the chain once they've played their role.

The classic example of an accidental cause is your parents -- even if they die, you continue to exist. (This is NOT to say that your parents made you by accident. That's a different kind of accident -- and I'm sure they were very careful about that kind of thing.) But in an essential causal relationship, if your cause stops you stop too. 

The sun and haircut examples seem better and yet feel amiss to me somehow.

Yep, I have yet to find the perfect way to say it. Modern people just don't think that way naturally, so it's hard to express in an intuitive way. If you think of a good example please let us know!