[Ham] > cause-and-effect precept of finitude in > space/time leads to the paradox of > infinite regression.
[Craig, previously] > I'm all for "the cause-and-effect precept of finitude in > space/time", but how does it allegedly lead to the paradox of infinite > regression? Do you have an > argument for that? [Ham] > You expressed [the argument] above when you said "a creator cannot create itself." This is a true statement, but not the requisite argument. [Ham] > If everything has a cause, then who or > what caused the Creator? The paradox, of course, is that the law of > 'cause-and-effect' applied to metaphysics would hold that there is no > primary source because an infinite series of "causes" is required to create > the Creator. The idea of the first cause being an "uncreated" source seems > to have eluded the philosophers. [Ham, reconstructed] 1) If everything has a cause, there must already have been an infinite series of causes 2) There cannot already have been an infinite series of causes 3) :. Not everything has a cause 4) Every cause has a source/creator 5) :. There must have been an uncreated source/creator So it seems that "the cause-and-effect precept of finitude in space/time", does not lead to the paradox of infinite regression (as you claimed), but rather to the conclusion that 5) There must have been an uncreated source/creator? But that "There must have been an uncreated source/creator" does not entail there still is one. Craig Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
