The inference from eternal constancy of the First Cause to its causal efficacy therefore smuggles in a rationalist notion of necessary causation that begs the question against empiricist accounts.

?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.

First Cause(Used to explain why scientific axioms fall short of perfect correspondence to reality): The ultimate explanatory ground of reality, complete understanding of which would ground perfect knowledge of scientific axioms
Necessary causation(as used in metaphysics): The idea that if something causes an effect, it must always cause that effect in the same way—there's no way around it or exception to it.
Rationalism(European philosophy, 17th century): A philosophical approach that grounds human knowledge in rational principles not susceptible to doubt, accessed through the light of reason rather than sacred text or ecclesiastical authority.
begs the question(Informal fallacy in epistemic justification): A circular argument in which warrant for the premises already presupposes the truth of the conclusion

Based on where you are in your exploration