Unmoved mover

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m
(Counter-apologetics: Some more counter-apologetics.)
Line 7: Line 7:
  
 
#[[Who created God?]]
 
#[[Who created God?]]
 +
# The word "God" carries a lot of undesirable cultural baggage, denoting an intelligent being. If the ultimate cause of our universe turns out to be, say, a random vacuum fluctuation, then that would be "God" by Aquinas's definition, but to call this phenomenon "God" would be misleading.
 +
# Pairs of virtual particles are created (and annihilated) all of the time, in vacuum, out of literally nothing. These particles affect each other's motion, thus disproving Aquinas's premise.
 +
# More exotically, if time were circular (i.e., if time repeated every so often, so that the year 1 were also the year ten trillion and one), then every motion could have a prior cause without infinite regress. This does not seem to be the case, though.
 +
# Even if there is an infinite regess of causes, so what? The human mind is uncomfortable with the concept of infinity, but reality has no obligation to make us comfortable.
  
 
[[Category: Arguments]]
 
[[Category: Arguments]]
 
[[Category: Arguments for the existence of God]]
 
[[Category: Arguments for the existence of God]]
 
[[Category: Cosmological arguments]]
 
[[Category: Cosmological arguments]]

Revision as of 00:34, 30 December 2006

As formulated by Thomas Aquinas, the unmoved mover argument is stated as follows:

"Nothing moves without a prior mover. This leads us to a regress, from which the only escape is God. Something had to make the first move, and that something we call God."

Counter-apologetics

  1. Who created God?
  2. The word "God" carries a lot of undesirable cultural baggage, denoting an intelligent being. If the ultimate cause of our universe turns out to be, say, a random vacuum fluctuation, then that would be "God" by Aquinas's definition, but to call this phenomenon "God" would be misleading.
  3. Pairs of virtual particles are created (and annihilated) all of the time, in vacuum, out of literally nothing. These particles affect each other's motion, thus disproving Aquinas's premise.
  4. More exotically, if time were circular (i.e., if time repeated every so often, so that the year 1 were also the year ten trillion and one), then every motion could have a prior cause without infinite regress. This does not seem to be the case, though.
  5. Even if there is an infinite regess of causes, so what? The human mind is uncomfortable with the concept of infinity, but reality has no obligation to make us comfortable.
Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
wiki navigation
IronChariots.Org
Toolbox