Monday, September 10, 2012

Flaws of the cosmological argument

The first argument I will be addressing is the cosmological argument.  It basically goes as follows.  Everything must have a cause.  The universe must have a cause.  That cause is god.  The Kalam argument simply adds in an assumed finite limit to time.

1:  Quantum fluctuations do not have causes.  They are created from nothing and go in to nothing.  The first statement is demonstrably wrong.
2:  There's no reason why time can not be infinite.  The argument by theologians and philosophers are simply making the same err as the Zeno paradoxes.
3:  We have no example of nothing as would be the case before existence; nothing can be concluded about the properties of preexistence.
4:  The big bang was a singularity.  We do not know what happened before the big bang.

Assuming the universe was caused:
1:  There's no reason to believe that cause still exists.
2:  There's no reason to believe that cause was conscious.
3:  There's no reason to believe that cause was a being.
4:  There's no reason to believe any specific characteristic about that cause.

Finaly, there's absolutely no rational connection between "the universe had a cause" to "the god of my particular religion exists".

No comments:

Post a Comment