First Cause (Introduction)

by dhw, Saturday, September 24, 2011, 17:00 (4788 days ago) @ David Turell

Dhw: I'm afraid the magic formula "First Cause" doesn't make it any the more logical. And so, stuck between two exitless labyrinths, I remain on my picket fence.-DAVID: But it does. Do you believe everything has a cause? In your experience have you ever seen a phenomenon or experienced one without a cause? By definition there must be an uncaused first cause. There must be something to start off the progression of causes to us. Pure Aristotle.-Round and round...If everything has a cause, by definition of what must there be an uncaused first cause? But I'm not objecting to the concept. I think it was Thomas Aquinas who took over the "first cause" argument to prove the existence of his version of God, and the term has been stuck with this connotation ever since ... much as "intelligent design" has been contaminated by the Creationists. In both cases, more's the pity. I'm merely pointing out that for you the uncaused first cause is conscious energy (a UI), and for an atheist it's "mindless energy producing an infinity and eternity of random combinations, one of which eventually leads to 'now'" (my post of 23 Sept. at 19.04). (I wish an atheist would confirm or correct this, as I'm reluctant to be their spokesman.) In my view, both "first causes" are equally inexplicable, inconceivable and unbelievable. One of them must be right, which shows how pathetic my judgement is, but ... again in my view ... we shall never know which one.