The Cosmological Argument - Wikipedia
Many Theists, Deists and Non-Theists argue that not only does the universe's existence necessitate a cause. The Theists and Deists often posit that the cause is a supreme being.
Most Theists and some Deists further posit that said being has granted us free agency; that is to do according to something other than what simple physical interaction would otherwise dictate.
In positing free will, has a violation of causality not been necessarily invoked?
One premise of the Cosmological argument is that causality holds true, which logically dictates that our actions necessitate cause.
For debate:
-Is it possible to reconcile the Cosmological Argument with Free Will?
Free Will and The Cosmological Argument.
Moderator: Moderators
Re: Free Will and The Cosmological Argument.
Post #2Two possibilities:AkiThePirate wrote:...-Is it possible to reconcile the Cosmological Argument with Free Will?
1) Humans may be comprised of physical matter and some non-material component. Physical matter is governed by causality, but the non-material component may have a certain degree of autonomy.
2) Humans have the ability to pray. Christians have always believed that prayer opens us up to another Person, another Influence. In the same way that an encounter with another human may cause us to think or act differently, so also an encounter with God may cause us to think and act differently.
Perhaps we are free only when we pray...
Post #3
In hypothesising that a non-physical component exists allowing a degree of autonomy consistent with macroscopic choice, one must posit things which are not observed to exist. In the simplest manner, energy must be created and destroyed in absolutely mind-boggling quantities to allow you to choose Pepsi over Coke.
Edit: Expanding on this, allow me to show why.
Given the Cosmological Argument, we can assume that the universe is ultimately causal as that is a premise. Given this, on some physical level, causal chains must end and new chains must be created in making a choice.
In a fundamental manner, mind-boggling quantities of particles would have to be created and annihilated in a manner of microseconds to move your hand across the shelf to the bottle of Pepsi. If we assume that this can and does happen, everything we know about particles is a lie.
If prayer is the only way that freedom is granted, would one not conclude that what for and when the prayer is made is causally linked to God?
Edit: Expanding on this, allow me to show why.
Given the Cosmological Argument, we can assume that the universe is ultimately causal as that is a premise. Given this, on some physical level, causal chains must end and new chains must be created in making a choice.
In a fundamental manner, mind-boggling quantities of particles would have to be created and annihilated in a manner of microseconds to move your hand across the shelf to the bottle of Pepsi. If we assume that this can and does happen, everything we know about particles is a lie.
If prayer is the only way that freedom is granted, would one not conclude that what for and when the prayer is made is causally linked to God?
Post #5
Most of what passes for modern-day physics was never "observed" to exist until very recently. Who is to say what new discoveries are still in store for the field of physics?AkiThePirate wrote:...one must posit things which are not observed to exist. In the simplest manner...
I suppose God can initiate the contact, in the same way that a long-lost friend might decide to pick up the phone and call. Or perhaps God has designed us with a prayer-hotline to Him, and we only need to be reminded to use it.AkiThePirate wrote:...If prayer is the only way that freedom is granted, would one not conclude that what for and when the prayer is made is causally linked to God?
Post #6
This would be a valid point if it wasn't for the scale of things involved.[color=orange]EduChris[/color] wrote:Most of what passes for modern-day physics was never "observed" to exist until very recently. Who is to say what new discoveries are still in store for the field of physics?
Even in the 20s they'd have been capable of picking up on it if there were humongous amounts of particles just appearing from nowhere only when there were people around.
If you consider what a 'free choice' actually entails, it's impossible to rationalise the fact that no hypothesis allowing for it is consistent with what is observed and the fact that we are very clearly restricted by basic physical interactions anyway(We can't jump to the moon).
Again, I fail to see how anything other than God is responsible for anything.[color=cyan]EduChris[/color] wrote:I suppose God can initiate the contact, in the same way that a long-lost friend might decide to pick up the phone and call. Or perhaps God has designed us with a prayer-hotline to Him, and we only need to be reminded to use it.
Post #7
Who is to say what is or isn't possible. Richard Dawkins says that given enough time, it is theoretically possible that a cow could actually jump clear over the moon...(Blind Watchmaker, p. 160).AkiThePirate wrote:...We can't jump to the moon...
Post #9
Correction: overriding the KNOWN physical laws of the universe. Even Steven Hawkings has admitted that modern-day physicists don't know everything there is to know--and going by past history, science is always either wrong or incomplete.AkiThePirate wrote:...overriding the physical laws of the universe...
Post #10
But therefore you're assuming that there is a law that emulates gravity but prevents us from doing anything that might be construed as impossible by the average human...
I don't think you realise how the original postulate doesn't make any sense.
I don't think you realise how the original postulate doesn't make any sense.
