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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The first premise of the kalām cosmological argument is false.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The kalām cosmological argument's conclusion (that God caused the beginning of the universe) is false.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the conclusion of a valid argument is false, at least one premise must be false.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The first premise of the kalām argument is the most likely candidate to be false given Davies's account of the universe's self-contained origin.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Quantum mechanics demonstrates that virtual particles come into existence without prior causes, violating causal closure at the microphysical level.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Lawrence Krauss and David Albert's debate over 'nothing' shows that the causal principle generalizes illegitimately from macro-experience to cosmological origins.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If causation is a concept derived from temporal succession within the universe, it cannot coherently apply to the universe's own origin ex nihilo.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hume's critique in the Enquiry establishes that causal necessity is a psychological habit, not a metaphysically binding principle governing all possible states of affairs.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Graham Oppy's modal skepticism shows that the kalam premise 'everything that begins to exist has a cause' lacks the epistemic warrant needed for a sound cosmological argument.
      ?

      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.