Total Posts:2|Showing Posts:1-2
Jump to topic:

A trivial problem with the KCA

Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2013 3:12:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I say it is trivial, because it is. The argument is:

P1: Everything that begins to exist has a cause

P2: The universe began to exist

C: Therefore, the universe has a cause

The argument is actually invalid. Because P1 only speaks on things that begin to exist in the present tense. The first premise only lets us know that if something begins to exist, it has a cause. However, that says nothing on the future or past. It could be true that everything that begins to exist has a cause, but false that everything that began to exist had a cause, and that everything that will begin to exist will have a cause. Therefore, the first premise should be:

P1: Everything that began, begins, or will begin to exist had, has, and/or will have a cause

P2: The universe began to exist

C:Therefore, the universe had a cause

The is another sneaky move of the Kalam, because even if the universe had a cause, that doesn't mean is "has" a cause. Even if a cause existed "prior" to the universe; that doesn't mean the cause exists now. Therefore, the Kalam cannot even be an argument for God.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2013 3:14:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/5/2013 3:12:35 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
I say it is trivial, because it is. The argument is:

P1: Everything that begins to exist has a cause

P2: The universe began to exist

C: Therefore, the universe has a cause

The argument is actually invalid. Because P1 only speaks on things that begin to exist in the present tense. The first premise only lets us know that if something begins to exist, it has a cause. However, that says nothing on the future or past. It could be true that everything that begins to exist has a cause, but false that everything that began to exist had a cause, and that everything that will begin to exist will have a cause. Therefore, the first premise should be:

P1: Everything that began, begins, or will begin to exist had, has, and/or will have a cause

P2: The universe began to exist

C:Therefore, the universe had a cause


The is another sneaky move of the Kalam, because even if the universe had a cause, that doesn't mean is "has" a cause. Even if a cause existed "prior" to the universe; that doesn't mean the cause exists now. Therefore, the Kalam cannot even be an argument for God.

(correction)
*The is another sneaky move of the Kalam, because even if the universe had a cause, that doesn't mean it "has" a cause.