You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

Philosophim

Comments

Where is the infinite regress? If we don't need spacetime before spacetime (as this sentence doesn't make any sense), and go from nothing to spacetime...
February 09, 2024 at 18:33
I don't think an accurate assessment is undermining. Out of the people recently posting in this thread, I think you grasp the argument the best.
February 09, 2024 at 18:02
Right. I never agreed that we need spacetime before a change can happen. I agreed that we need spacetime for a change to happen. The start of spacetim...
February 09, 2024 at 16:30
Then you're ascribing an identity to a thing in itself. There is no indirect or direct knowledge of anything about a thing in itself besides the fact ...
February 09, 2024 at 15:47
Sure. Lets go with, "That which has an identity. An identity is how it interacts with what is around itself" Basically anything that isn't nothing, as...
February 09, 2024 at 15:10
There is no waiting for it, as there is nothing doing the waiting. No, but spacetime happened after there being nothing, so we have a change, and we h...
February 09, 2024 at 15:06
Yes, this idea is in its exploratory phase, so these discussions are very helpful to see if there is any merit to the ideas here. Not a worry! Time is...
February 09, 2024 at 14:34
Good to see a little levity here! It all started when I read the Kalem cosmological argument long ago. Of course it was easy to see that the idea that...
February 09, 2024 at 03:33
No, it is specifically a first cause, not just any cause. Perfect! Correct. The wording about physics is a little to vague for me. "A principal first ...
February 09, 2024 at 03:28
Yes, and I made two points you'll have to consider. 1. We have nothing, then spacetime. Change happened with spacetime. 2. There is nothing in your ar...
February 08, 2024 at 14:26
Exactly, well said Ludwig!
February 08, 2024 at 07:20
I'm saying at least one first cause is logically necessary, and the consequences of that being so. I'm not including or excluding anything but definin...
February 08, 2024 at 04:13
Ucarr, the context of the statement is implying the first cause of that specific chain. Not the 'first' first cause ever. Let me be clear and unambigu...
February 07, 2024 at 22:19
Seems like we're going round and round here at this point. Which is fine, it just means its likely time to end it. But if spacetime appears, we have s...
February 07, 2024 at 21:37
Yes. :) And the above still applies. If there is no point prior to spacetime (remember, you noted earlier time cannot exist alone, its a property of s...
February 07, 2024 at 18:40
No, I don't think so because what you've concluded is that we need spacetime for other changes besides spacetime. You haven't proven that spacetime it...
February 07, 2024 at 17:53
Does it? What caused 3? What caused the line to be drawn that particular way instead of any other way? And if there is nothing that caused it to be dr...
February 07, 2024 at 05:30
A causes B causes C is a causal chain. Every point within that chain has a prior point except the first cause. The logical conclusion is that there mu...
February 07, 2024 at 05:28
Thank you for posting Brenden, I will try to address your points the best I can. Those two statements don't appear to be that far off. If existence is...
February 07, 2024 at 00:11
I'm not sure what you mean. Does time continue? Yes. Is it necessarily the case that more first causes will happen? No. Is it necessarily the case tha...
February 06, 2024 at 23:58
Trying to throw in some extra vocabulary doesn't solve the issue. Lord knows its a common tactic among many on the forums. :D We should be able to exp...
February 06, 2024 at 22:31
I think you've made a pretty good argument so far, but here is where you're stuck. I think its fine to call spacetime a substance, but plugging it int...
February 06, 2024 at 15:13
True, 'swelling' is more of an implicit intention. My point is I don't think you need to introduce space as a 'thing in itself'. Anytime we try to def...
February 05, 2024 at 20:06
I think its clear that we've both said our piece at this point and no further value can be added to the discussion. I think its fair to say we agree t...
February 05, 2024 at 19:42
This is really close. Let me break it down to be sure. "Do you accept the following argument: Since by definition a first cause can't have any derivat...
February 05, 2024 at 19:39
So I think what you're going for here is saying we would need spacetime to be for spacetime to appear. But that doesn't really make sense right? If sp...
February 05, 2024 at 19:27
Because our logic comes from and involves things that already exist. No one has every empirically observed 'nothing' then seen something come from it....
February 05, 2024 at 18:00
True. And I never make a claim that my point is empirically proven, its only logic. I have another thread where I'm exploring an objective morality wi...
February 05, 2024 at 17:51
No, I did not claim a first cause is the inception of all creation. A first cause is the inception of a causality chain. The entirety of our universe ...
February 05, 2024 at 17:22
I had to think about this one a while, as part of this conversation with you is learning what needs to be said and what is irrelevant in a discussion ...
February 05, 2024 at 16:21
This is a nice attempt, but its just an empirical observation of change withing spacetime. What we haven't observed is if its impossible for spacetime...
February 05, 2024 at 16:03
This is a good topic Bob. I think it helps to define what space and time are. Space is the property we attribute to a things 'swell of existence'. Spa...
February 04, 2024 at 15:55
Ok, with that, lets see if we can break down the underlying essence of what makes the argument compelling. Spacetime is 'something". Its an existent m...
February 04, 2024 at 15:36
Because the rabbi, priest, or minister claims to have knowledge of what the first cause is. I do not. My definition would put the rabbi, priest, or mi...
February 04, 2024 at 15:15
My intention was not to side step your hypothetical. It was to note in this instance, especially because you are still learning the theory, it would b...
February 04, 2024 at 15:03
Then why not ask me to give a better example? You've been accusing me of being dishonest and besmirching my character instead of asking. It wasn't mea...
February 04, 2024 at 04:49
You didn't tag what was true and false in your breakdown, so I assumed that A was true and B was false in isolation. If your intention is that the bre...
February 03, 2024 at 23:57
That's another way to break it down if you would like. Same idea.
February 03, 2024 at 23:32
No, I'm saying there's no prior cause for a first cause to exist, so there cannot be any prior limitations as to what a first cause had to be. No prio...
February 03, 2024 at 23:31
I say there can be no prior cause, and thus no prior reason. But reason is sometimes used as a term of explanation. Depending on a person's use of rea...
February 03, 2024 at 22:54
Not a problem! We're here to think with each other. Also welcome to the forums. You will encounter some people who will talk down to you or passively ...
February 03, 2024 at 22:48
Let me point out a weakness that needs to be resolved here. P1. Time is needed for any change. What is time? Without this definition nothing can be pr...
February 03, 2024 at 17:58
Its just a bad contraction. If we break out the sentence into its full meaning, its fine. A. This is a sentence. True B. The sentence in point A is a ...
February 03, 2024 at 17:50
Existence is a set of all things that exist. I note that its a set of existence. So for example I can say, "What causes rain?" Or, "What causes water?...
February 03, 2024 at 17:48
We've already gone over this, but I'll say it again if it was missed. If there is no prior cause, there is no prior reason. There is no unspecified te...
February 03, 2024 at 17:33
Prove that something is circular. Your opinions on the matter don't make them correct.
February 03, 2024 at 17:19
I've given several examples. All I'm asking is for you to do the same. I'm not asking for proof that such a thing exists, just give me a possible exam...
February 03, 2024 at 17:17
To be clear, there is no limitation upon what can be incepted. Once a first cause exists, it is bound to causation by what it is. For example, lets sa...
February 03, 2024 at 16:28
Absolutely. The reason I say "time tick" is because if I said seconds, then we could divide into milliseconds, then...you get it. A first cause exists...
February 03, 2024 at 15:26
No, and I made a slight mistake in my wording here. "A" first cause. Because there is no prior cause for a first cause, there is no limitation on what...
February 02, 2024 at 22:03