Posted on 04/07/2008 7:40:21 AM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
David Hume was a Scottish philospoher well known for his attack on the principle of causality - the principle that nothing can occur or exist without a cause.
He believed that although one event (set of impressions) always preceded another, this did not prove that the first event caused the second. The constant conjunction of two events, he said, built up the expectation that the second event would take place after the first. But this was nothing more than a strong belief or habit of mind taught by experience. One could never prove that there were causal connections among impressions.
It must be noted that Hume believed that all knowledge came from experience and all experiences existed only in the mind as individual units of experience. Whatever a person directly experienced was nothing more than the contents of his own consciousness or mind.
If the expectation that a second event takes place after the first is a stong belief or habit of mind taught by experience, then Empirical evidence (non-impressionary evidnce) id needed to provide the cause of the effect.
With the aforemntioned in mind, we need Empirical evidence that the Singularity which expanded and is still expanding (our universe) is an effect without cause. We need evidence that our universe is an expanding singularity that came from nothing. But, how can one observe, test and confirm - provide cause - if the Singularity came from nothing? How does one observe, test and confirm that which does not exist?
If this universe (the expanding Singularity) has always existed, how does this line up with Cosmological evidence that this universe had a beginning and will come to an end, since there isn't enough matter in this universe for it to contract?
If this now expanding Singularity (our universe) came about through natural means, what preceded it? How did it come about? From nothing? Did it come about through purely natural means as well, and on and on Ad Infinitum?
What say you?
You've caused me to wonder how what you've written effects the refutation you seek...
Are you a comedian?
Are you a comedian?
I've never aimed that high!
Still, even though it's quite possible that I'm even more dull than usual this morning, could you pinpoint the key paragraph in your post that effects the refutation you seek? I don't see it.
1.) Please provide Empirical evidence that our universe is a universe without cause, or that the effect - the Singularity which expanded and is still expanding (our universe) - is an effect that came about from nothing.
2.) Please provide Empirical evidence that our universe has always existed and will contract again over and over again.
3.) Please provide Empirical evidence that our supposedly naturalistic universe was preceded - on and on Ad Infinitum - through purely natural means. In doing so, would this not be an Ad Infinitum natural means logical fallacy?
Read through again. That which you seek is right before your eyes.
Hume provided an argument against Causality. He did not provide an argument for something. That argument FOR something is what I seek from atheists, namely, 1, 2, and 3.
Did you hear the one about the Calvinist who dies and goes to heaven?
He finds a forked path, with two signs. One sign reads: Predestination. The other sign reads: Free Will.
Being a good Calvinist he follows the path marked Predestination and eventually comes to a huge wall with a door. Over the top of the door is the word: Predestination.
He knocks on the door and an angel opens the door and asks him: “Why did you come to this door.”
“I chose to follow the path of Predestination because I’m a Calvinist.”
“You CHOSE?” says the angel. “Wrong door!” And slams the door in the man’s face.
The man is brokenhearted but eventually makes his way back to the fork in the road and takes the other path, whereupon he comes to another huge wall with a door labeled Free Will.
He knocks on that door and again an angel answers and says, “Why did you come to this door?”
“I had no choice!” says the man.
Slam!
I say they didn’t start to attack the
“Principal of Causality” (anything that occurs has A cause)
until it was pretty tightly proven that the Universe had a definite beginning.
Combine a definite beginning with the causality principal, and you have to have a transcendent Creator.
How could he choose to follow the path of Calvinism if God - who would exist outside of time - knew that he would be a Calvinist before He even brought the universe into existence?
(grin)
Hume provided an argument against Causality. He did not provide an argument for something. That argument FOR something is what I seek from atheists, namely, 1, 2, and 3.
I misunderstood your intent. So you're not actually trying to construct an argument against Hume; rather, you're seeking to highlight some supposed obstacles to atheism. An interesting endeavor, no doubt, but not quite what your title suggested.
There I was cruising down the highway just keeping the Chevy aimed and the gas pedal against the firewall. The engine temperature and oil pressure idiot lights were dark but I was watchning them anyway. A sign flashed by ‘Coal Town 3 Miles’ so I took my foot off the gas and let air resistance begin to slow the car. After a while I noticed individual trees and the solid white line in the center of the road was actually a dashed line. When the car slowed to a crawl I glanced at the speedometer. 95 mph. So I logged into FR and found this thread.
No, I showed that Hume’s arguments were and are riddled with holes.
He, being an agnostic, and fellow agnostics (or atheists) after him did not and do not stress the need to provide Empirical evidence for 1.)- 3.) concerning Causality.
He only provided and argument AGAINST Causality.
I have provided the balance needed.
Atheists,
Please provide an answer to 1.) - 3.)
Thank you.
Arguing against causality simply won’t do.
How could he choose to follow the path of Calvinism if God - who would exist outside of time - knew that he would be a Calvinist before He even brought the universe into existence?Or, in the words of that great philosopher James Stockdale: Why am I here?
I’m going to have to check and see whether that Stockdale moment is on YouTube. I’ve never seen the video of him saying that...
Please post the link if you find it.
What’s a singularity? Who says it came from nothing?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.