SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : The Philosophical Porch
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: software salesperson who wrote (142)8/4/2005 7:42:50 PM
From: TimF   of 26251
 
The main ontological argument goes:

1) whatever exists must have a cause of its existence
2) thus, there is either an infinite series of causes or there is a cause which is the cause of itself
3) there can’t be an infinite series of causes
4) therefore, there is a cause which is the cause of itself

Sometimes called "the uncaused cause" argument.

The form of the argument seems valid to me. Some people might question premises 1 or 3. And as you stated an "uncaused cause" could easily be something very different than the Christian view of God or any other religion's opinion of a devine being or force.

1) we see structure in human artifacts, e.g. watch
2) we see more complicated structure in the universe
3) if the effects are the same, so must be the causes
4) therefore, since artifacts are made by intelligent Man, the universe was made by a super-intelligent being

As much as I do believe in God (if not very strongly), I find this argument unconvincing. The key premise, number 3, seems highly questionable to me.

Tim
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News