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

[brewer]

Correct.  As you would find in the link Bel offered, infinite regress has been argued to be incompatible with specific analytical positions and particular metaphysical ideologies or principles - but a difficulty for systems that people use to organize their thoughts or assert their beliefs is not a problem for the universe.  It's our problem.  There are and have always been things that do exist and are a problem for us or some other belief we hold.  As I said pages and pages ago, in this arguments against infinite regress are appeals to consequence.  If infinite regress existed, that would be bad -for whatever x the arguer holds dear-.  I actually agree with this and it is troubling, but, ofc... it doesn't follow that because a thing would be inconvenient to a cherished belief that thing must not exist.

It's a wonder to me that the faithful mine dead and dead-end arguments from antiquity when pursuing the case for their gods.  We've gotten much better at arguing since saint tommys failed attempt at syncretism, and we know a hell of alot more about the world we live in.  A god informed by better arguments and by greater and more accurate data sets would seem to be preferable, to me.  I suppose it might not end up looking like the god they wish existed - the central trouble that the religious often have and what..to me..indicates a deplorable shallowness in their beliefs...but hey..whatever.  Like infinite regress, that's our problem, not a gods problem.

You falsely assume that I follow this discussion routinely. But NBD. Couldn't help but take another jab at NX and Bel.