Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Nothing can be temporally prior to a series of causes and... — Carmelics
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→It is a philosophical mistake to seek a cause of an eternal or beginningless causal series.

    Nothing can be temporally prior to a series of causes and effects that has no beginning or exists for eternity.

    CausationNatural Theology
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Natural TheologyCausation

    Connections

    1 topic

    Modality & Possibility1 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Natural Theology
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    A cause must be prior to its effect in time.It is a philosophical mistake to seek a cause of an eternal or beginningless cau...

    Similar

    A cause must be prior to its effect in time.86%God can be the causal explanation of a series of contingent beings wit...82%A cause must go entirely out of existence before its effect arises, as...81%To ask whether something is an effect requires that something temporal...81%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: hume-religion
    View source passageHide passage
    The step in this argument that seems most questionable is the claim that because each element in the causal chain has been explained, in terms of some earlier member of the chain, we have “sufficiently explained” why there exists any such chain or why this particular chain exists. Critics will argue that this has plainly not been done. One response to this is argue that it is a philosophical mistake to look for an explanation of this kind, on the ground that a cause must be prior to its effect i

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective