On 10/19/2014 6:59 PM, jr_...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote:
I have asked Curtis about his support or evidence for disagreeing with
the statements in the Kalam Cosmological Argument. But he just gave
me a lot of song and dance about his opinions without providing the
evidence for his arguments. Can you give us a solid argument with
evidence and support why the statements in the KCA have a flaw?
Let's take the KCA which states:
1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause;
2. The universe began to exist;
3. The universe has a cause.
Do you agree with statement 1 or not? If not, please give us your
reasons for disagreeing.
1. There was a "big bang" event.
2. This event has an uncaused cause.
3. Causation is known through consciousness.
/Causality is the relation between an event and a second event in which
the second event is a consequence of the first./
/Causation (karma) is the bedrock of the historical Buddha's
enlightenment experience. At that moment he knew the law of cause and
effect - the law of reciprocity in which every action inevitably leads
to a reaction//. There are no chance events./ /He realized that
everything happens for a reason, that for every event there is a cause./
/Causality: The Central Philosophy of Buddhism/
by David J. Kalupahana
University of Hawai'i Press, 1986