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
    The first premise of the kalām argument (that everything ... — Carmelics
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The first premise of the kalām argument (that everything that begins to exist has a cause) is true.

    Natural Theology
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The Causal Principle is intuitively obvious; no one seriously denies it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The metaphysical intuition that something cannot come out of nothing supports the Causal Principle.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.No one sincerely believes that things, such as a horse or an Eskimo village, can just pop into being without a cause, and this includes the universe.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Quantum mechanics reveals that virtual particles and radioactive decay events occur without deterministic prior causes, per standard Copenhagen interpretation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If uncaused events occur within the universe, the Causal Principle is not a necessary metaphysical truth but an empirical generalization with known exceptions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An empirical generalization with known exceptions cannot serve as a universally reliable premise for deducing the cause of the universe's origin.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Our causal intuitions are formed exclusively through experience of objects arising within an already-existing spatiotemporal framework with prior conditions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Applying the concept 'begins to exist' and its associated causal principle to the universe as a whole — where no prior spatiotemporal framework exists — commits a category error identified by Kant as illegitimate extension of the understanding beyond possible experience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A principle whose justification is entirely intra-cosmic experience cannot be projected without argument onto the genesis of the cosmos itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Natural Theology

    Related

    A principle whose justification is entirely intra-cosmic experience cannot be pr...An empirical generalization with known exceptions cannot serve as a universally ...Applying the concept 'begins to exist' and its associated causal principle to th...If uncaused events occur within the universe, the Causal Principle is not a nece...
    +5 moreShow less
    No one sincerely believes that things, such as a horse or an Eskimo village, can...Our causal intuitions are formed exclusively through experience of objects arisi...Quantum mechanics reveals that virtual particles and radioactive decay events oc...The Causal Principle is intuitively obvious; no one seriously denies it.The metaphysical intuition that something cannot come out of nothing supports th...

    Similar

    The first premise of the kalām argument (the Causal Principle) is true...84%The first premise of the kalām argument is the most likely candidate t...84%The existence of something requires a first cause or sufficient ground...83%Every being which begins to exist has a cause for its beginning82%

    Source

    AI-extracted2/3 agreementValid
    SEP: cosmological-argument
    Craig, in Craig and Smith 1993; Craig and Sinclair 2009
    View source passageHide passage
    The basis for the argument’s first premise is the Causal Principle that undergirds many cosmological arguments. (Oderberg [2002: 308] is mistaken when he tries to establish the uniqueness of the kalām argument by denying that the Causal Principle plays a role in kalām argument. It only does not play a role in supporting a particular premise in the argument.) Defenders and critics alike suggest that basing the argument on the Principle of Causation rather than on the more general Principle of Sufficient Reason is advantageous to the argument (Morriston 2000: 149). Craig holds that the first pre...
    Extraction notes

    Validity: The extracted argument accurately captures Craig's reasoning as presented in the source passage, where he supports the first premise of the kalām argument by appealing to intuitive obviousness, the metaphysical intuition that something cannot come from nothing, and the common-sense observation that things like horses or Eskimo villages cannot pop into being without a cause.

    Confidence: Clear argument with explicit premises and conclusion drawn from Craig's defense of the first premise.

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit