Till: logical argument

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

NUSBAUM


>>1)  Whatever begins to exist, has a cause.

>>2)  The universe began to exist.

>>3)  Therefore the universe had a cause.

>>

>>If I recall, you proposed the eternal nature of the universe...that's how

>you got out of number two, however, what did you do with number one?


AUSTIN
Farell doesn't want to be bothered with this, but I'll bite.

Number one is simply incorrect. It is not true that whatever begins to
exist has a cause. Particles and anti-particles  appear and disappear
through quantum flucations, but are not caused.

Number two is simply non-sensical. For something to "begin," there must be
a time before during which it wasn't and a time after during which it
is/was. However, time is inherent in our universe. Time, as we understand,
does not "exist" outside the universe. Thus, it did not exist before the
universe. Thus, thre cannot be a "time before." Speaking of "before" the
universe is like trying to speak of "north" of the universe. It is an
incoherent statement.

Since both premises are invalid, the conclusion fails.


Austin Cline; German Department; Princeton University
--- The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher
      esteem those who think alike than those who think differently.

               - Nietzsche "The Dawn" (1881)

• Previous message: Till: logical argument
• Next message: Till: logical argument
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]