donald@utcsrgv.UUCP (Don Chan) (08/21/83)
Alan Wexelblat's argument for the existence of the "eternal Is", is more or
less a variation on St. Augustine's (or was it Aquinas?) Prime Mover argument.
Human thought, however, seems to be somehow outside the chain of causality
... In other words, humans, as a result of their cognitive processes seem
to be capable of causing events without the humans' thoughts being
determined by outside causes.
There certainly is no evidence for this; on the contrary it seems that all
of our thoughts are determined by outside causes. e.g. Tom is a Moonie
BECAUSE he has been brainwashed, Dick likes ice cream BECAUSE it has a
pleasant taste to him, Harry takes the bus BECAUSE he can't drive...
I am posting this article BECAUSE I read yours and I disagree with you
BECAUSE of a multitude of complex reasons involving what I read and
my other experiences in life.
All these thoughts and decisions by no means come out of the blue.
So, if ... cognition is the only thing (other than physical causes)
which can produce physical effects, we need to posit a cognition which
caused the first event (see above). I call that cognition the eternal Is.
You have implicitly assumed that all events eventually regress to an
initiating "cognition". This obviously begs the question. Even if there
was a "first event" why do you assume that a "cognition" initiated it?
I fail to see why a "cognition" rather than a "physical cause" could have
caused "the first event", since even you admit that BOTH can produce
physical effects.
BTW, by "cognition" you probably mean "consciousness", and I'm not sure
what you mean by "physical cause"-- a cause not traceable back to an
initiating "cognition" perhaps?
I think that this reasoning holds, no matter what your universe-view.
... there needs to be a first event, and that event requires a first cause.
Consider the integers, where each number n has predecessor n-1,
viz. {..., -3, -2, -1, 0, 1, 2, 3,...}
There certainly is no "first" number. Similarly, why should there have to
be a "first event"?
It would seem that unless you wish to essentially take a "leap of faith"
and make some assumptions, you are forced to retreat into atheism.
--
Don Chan, University of Toronto
ARPAnet: utcsrgv!donald@UW-BEAVER
UUCP: { linus ihnp4 floyd allegra uw-beaver
ubc-vision cornell watmath hcr decwrl }!utcsrgv!donald
-or- { linus decvax research duke cwruecmp }!utzoo!utcsrgv!donald