The next argument in this series we shall be investigating will be the Kalam cosmological argument. Originally devised by Christian philosopher and theologian, John Philoponus, this argument was subsequently developed independently by Muslim philosopher and theologian, al-Ghazali. The argument proceeds from the fact that the universe has a beginning and concludes that there is a cause of the universe.
The argument is as follows:
1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. The universe has a cause.
In order to escape the conclusion, we must deny at least one of the two premises. Denying the first premise is patently absurd, as there is no possible state of affairs where things can come into being from absolutely no antecedent conditions whatsoever. Even in virtual particle-antiparticle pairs, these emerge from the quantum vacuum, which is a sea of fluctuating energy and not the total absence of being.
If things could just come into being without a cause, then why don't things constantly appear uncaused all of the time? Why is it only universes that can come into being uncaused? We can therefore conclude that the first premise is more plausibly true than its alternative. What then of the second premise?
At first blush, it might seem as if the atheist might have a little more truck, however, such a conclusion is premature. Whilst it might not be as obvious, the premise that the universe began to exist is certainly a sure one. The reason for this is because we have strong, scientific evidence that shows that the universe began to exist.
Moreover, philosophical considerations preclude the universe from being the kind of thing that can just exist uncaused. According to scientific evidence, we can conclude that the universe began to exist based on two factors: the expansion of the universe, and entropy. According to the Bord-Guth-Vilenkin theorem, any geodesic in a state of average, positive expansion must have a beginning.
Whereas, entropy is the tendency of closed systems to head towards equilibrium over time. Since we have not reached maximum entropy, it follows that the universe came into being a finite amount of time ago. Now, there are certain models that seek to posit a beginningless universe, but these models run into unique problems of their own that preclude them from being viable.
Philosophically, we can conclude that the universe is not the sort of thing that can exist without a beginning. For starters, the past series of events in time within the universe are formed via successive addition, and an actual infinite cannot be formed by successive addition. Such a series can be potentially infinite only.
What this means is that, whilst such a series can be endless, it cannot be beginningless. An actual infinity, if such a thing is even possible, can only exist all at once, so to speak. So, we can conclude with confidence that the universe has a beginning in the finite past.
A conceptual analysis of what it means to be a cause of the universe reveals several interesting properties such a thing must possess: it must be immaterial and spaceless, as well as timeless, for the universe consists of all time and space, and likewise contains all matter and energy.
As the cause of time, then it likewise follows that there can't be anything chronologically prior to such a cause, making it the first cause in the series of events in time. Such a cause is also itself uncaused, since it did not begin to exist a finite amount of time ago in the past.
Such a cause must also be personal. The main reason for this is because the only way to produce a temporal effect from a timeless cause is if it is endowed with the powers and faculty of willful decision-making. A timeless cause that is personal can freely will to effect change, thus resulting in the creation of time itself.
An impersonal timeless cause would only be capable of producing a timeless effect, and since we exist temporally and not timelessly, we can conclude with confidence that the first cause of the universe is likewise personal.
No comments:
Post a Comment