Unmoved mover
(Difference between revisions)
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 01:34, 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
- 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.
