The Principle of Contingent Causation: The Impossibility of Infinite Regress.

[Nishant Xavier]

Now, the argument may be formulated both logically and mathematically:

1. Now, every Contingent Being, by definition, is Contingent, i.e. Dependent on a Prior Being's Existence.

if we wrote it mathematically, for every Contingent Being, CB, CB(n) is dependent on CB(n-1); CB(n-1) on CB(n-2) etc.

2. But it is impossible for this series of contingent causation to go on until infinity.

Implicit in your argument is that a "being" of some sort or other caused anything.

Looks like begging the question to me. Reformulate your argument so that this undemonstrated premise is not present, and resubmit.

Thump:

1 is a basic Truth observed in Nature. You are contingent upon your parents, they on theirs, and this is true for animals, birds, and even other beings that are contingent upon the Planet's Existence in the first place. Therefore, that every contingent being is dependent on a prior being's existence is absolutely true and does not assume anything other than the stated premise itself. "beings of some sort" do cause other beings.

As soon as you see that every contingent being is dependent on another prior being, you should be able to see clearly that every being in existence cannot possibly be contingent being. In other words, at least One Being in Existence exists non-contingently.

The argument does not necessarily have to prove more than that. But it is successful in showing that much, unless either 1 or 2 can be refuted.

If you want to refute 1, give some examples of contingent beings that are not dependent on the existence of prior beings. 2 or 3 will suffice.

If you want to refute 2, you can try, but how would you even begin to do that? 2 is a logical and mathematical Truth. 3 follows from 1 and 2.

Regards,
Xavier.