(March 19, 2019 at 8:04 am)Belaqua Wrote: I'm not going to demonstrate them, as they tend to require more than a few sentences.
Offhand it's easy to name two: the Thomist argument for actus purus, and Spinoza's argument.
If these have been logically "demolished" I hope you'll point me to the relevant books. I would like to know more about them, and the only people I've found who can explain them properly feel they've lasted pretty well.
Aquinas and Spinoza. Old hat. Both have been done to death.
Why should I provide any reference at all? It is your claim that they are valid. Aquinas was a wingnut and Spinoza was misguided. End of. This is old hat. Not my problem if you fail to do your homework.