>Causality means everything must have a cause! >But what about the hecking universe, huh?

>Causality means everything must have a cause!
>But what about the hecking universe, huh?
>How could it come from nothing! It must have a creator… and that creator is god!
>That’s proo-
>Wait! What are you doing? You can’t just say that the universe is came from nothing or eternal because…. because they break causality! They have no cause! How can use believe in that!?
>The concept of an uncreated creator is ok because…. well it just is!!!

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Are you unaware that God is the uncaused cause?
    /thread

  2. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Welcome to special pleading

  3. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    quantum physics shits all over the idea that the universe must be causal anon

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Only if you don't know the basics of quantum physics, which is evidently your case my pseudoteric friend.

  4. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    All they're doing is ascribing the name "God" to the uncaused cause, whatever that may be. Arguing that the universe could be uncaused won't work. Better to ask them why the uncaused cause would do specific things the Abrahamic God does in the Bible.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      But why would they attribute the title of God to something that is potentially mindless? This is like calling storm clouds Zeus because it makes lightning

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        You just answered your own question.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Not sure if you're being sarcastic

  5. 2 years ago
    Dirk

    >causality means everything must have a cause
    False, it means every effect must have a cause

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous
      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Dirk is right on this one, causal determinism is effect <- cause, instead of cause -> effect. Don't blame me for the almost pointless distinction, it is what it is.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          > causal determinism
          You don't need determinism to have causality.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Yes, you don't.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      > every effect must have a cause
      And the proof that universe is an effect is?

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Signatures of simulation
        >arbitrary rules
        >simple building blocks
        >fine tuned parameters
        >complex results
        and evene within the simulation we have other problems
        >statistically impossible structures like living cells
        >incredible coincidences in nature
        >sun and moon are almost the exact same size when viewed from earth

        It's looking pretty artificial. It's looking like the writing in the sand was NOT a pebble.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      uh.. ok
      then the universe may not be an effect

      causality before the universe actually faces some huge issues, since time is a dimension within the universe and it may begin at the Big Bang. A before may not make sense as a concept.

      • 2 years ago
        Dirk

        >the universe may not be an effect
        >begin

  6. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I mean, it's not that farfetched to believe that there is an infinite number of causes going back before the Big Bang too.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      I guess either there's an infinite causal chain, or the first cause existed infinitely. But I don't see why I should prefer one over the other.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >or the first cause existed infinitely.

        Which makes a lot less sense than infinite causes.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          why is that? They're equally confusing to me.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            They are both confusing I just think the claim that a singular being or principle can be eternal requires a lot more fleshed out arguments in favor of it than simply saying there has never been a "time" where there have been no causes and effects.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Also, what if there's an infinite causal chain going back, but no effect chain going forward? The present isn't the uncaused caused but the unaffecting effect.

  7. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >The uncaused cause just happens to be the israelite god and the religion i happened to be born into.

  8. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >uncaused caused
    logic 101

    buddhists already gave the answer: dependent arising

    and before someone talks about 'infinite regress', that's regarded by buddhists as a heresy

  9. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    contingency
    necessity

    I accept your concession.

  10. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >Cause in this context explicitly refeers to physis, motion and material phenomena
    >God as an unmoved mover is not material.

    It was that easy.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *