No, you made that claim and gave an argument. But the argument was faulty and I pointed out the faults.<quoted text>
Are you asking me to go over all my posts thus far? I have proved that the existence of several uncaused causes is inadmissible.
There are two different concepts here:And
to answer your question about a precise definition of the term
"Primal Cause" I thought it would never be necessary. Primal Cause
is the first cause. The Cause before which there was none.
1. A first cause, in the sense that it is temporally previous to all others.
2. An uncaused cause. So there is no cause of this specific event prior to that event.
Now, something verifying the first definition would also verify the second, since causes are always previous to their effects.
But the converse is not true. It is quite possible to have many uncaused causes.
It is even logically possible that there are many uncaused causes that happen at the same time and previous to all other causes. Such would show the non-uniqueness of even definition 1.
This shows why it is important to have precise definitions.
Finally, your causal argument only applies to definition 2. The logic goes as follows:
1. There are events.
2. The cause of an event is different than that event and also different than any of the effects of that event.
3. Statements 1 and 2 show that there are two possibilities for any given event:
a. there is an infinite sequence of causes prior to that event
b. there is an uncaused cause prior to that event.
Now, you want to claim that the universe has finite age, so the possibility a. cannot happen. This does not follow as can be seen thus:
Original event (event 1) happens at time t=1.
The cause of event 1 (i.e. event 2) happens at time t=1/2.
The cause of event 2 (i.e. event 3) happens at time t=1/4.
The cause of event 3 (i.e. event 4) happens at time t=1/8.
Continuing in this way, and halving the time for each previous event, would give an infinite number of causes in a finite time.
So, you have NOT shown there is no infinite sequences of causality.
Now, even if that *had* been proven, there is still the issue of possibility b. We have to show there is a *unique* uncaused cause. But this is also an unproved statement.
In particular, you claims that any two causes have something in common without any demonstration of this and, in fact, it being contrary to common experience. So your claim of the uniqueness of uncaused causes is unproved.
In point of fact, most quantum level events are uncaused, and so we do have many uncaused causes. this shows the *non-uniqueness* of uncaused causes, which destroys your whole argument. It also shows that uncaused causes do not have to be 'perfect' or 'intelligent' or have 'will'.
Want to try again?