Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that If actual infinities are coherent, the regress of movers need not terminate in a first unmoved mover.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Mathematical infinite convergence doesn't establish that actual physical infinities are coherent in the real world of changing things.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
An infinite circular chain of movers each depending on prior movers violates the principle that explanation cannot be indefinitely deferred.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Even if infinities are logically coherent, their coherence doesn't explain why this particular infinite regress of motion exists rather than nothing.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Mathematical infinite series (e.g., 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8...) converge to definite values without requiring a first term, showing infinities can be coherent.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Circular causal chains in spacetime (if physically possible) could sustain motion indefinitely without needing an external unmoved mover.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The demand for a first mover assumes causation requires temporal priority, but simultaneous or atemporal causation might sustain infinite regresses.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.