The REAL Unmoved mover argument; can you challenge the it?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-09-2015, 05:50 AM
The REAL Unmoved mover argument; can you challenge the it?
(Okay I admit, this title was a little quite provocative)

Hello Smile

I consider myself as an agnostic-atheist, but I recently came across a "new" version of the first Way of Aquinas, or as some would argue : the "non-strawman fallacy" version. It seems like the rejections I knew about the first way do not longer works. For example, the argument seems compatible with an eternal universe and it answers the "How could you say that the pure act is God?"

But at the same time my sceptic mind wonder if the argument is really valid "as" (or "almost as") a proof; or at least as a reason that believing in god is more rational than not. Are there really strong counter-arguments to this version? Huh

Maybe I will take the rol of the Devil's (or I should say "God's" ) attorney in this thread. Not because I want to troll, but because I really want to find if there are Good and Solid objections against the first Way. So do not hesitate to give me your best shots (with sources if possible) in all ways you think the argument can be refuted Thumbsup

The argument is state here this link: http://imgur.com/pnoaIIC

A fuller version can be found here: https://www.reddit.com/r/cosmologicalargument/
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2015, 08:40 AM
RE: The REAL Unmoved mover argument; can you challenge the it?
The argument defeats itself. Big Grin

I'm sure the educated around here could give it a more formal thrashing, but anybody wants to try that with me is likely to convert to Gwynnite. Thumbsup

[Image: ZF1ZJ4M.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
01-09-2015, 09:27 AM
RE: The REAL Unmoved mover argument; can you challenge the it?
It still boils down to using god as a mechanism to explain something we do not currently understand. A was caused by B, B was caused by C, C by D, D by... ? Hmmm, we have no idea how to explain where D came from. Therefore, god.

Eventually we will discover what D really is, what it is made of and how it was formed and we will call it E. Then we will ask ourselves, "from whence came E?" The religious will say it is a mystery as such no human can comprehend and, therefore, god. They will incorporate E into the list of things god created to govern the universe and claim it as proof of god's fabulous design rather than disproof of their previously held position. Until, (surprise!) we unravel the true origin of E. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

It is a process that would go on forever if not for the fact that human existence will most likely be destroyed by the death throws of our own star or some other cosmological event at some point in the (hopefully far off) future.

I just wanted to let you know that I love you even though you aren't naked right now. Heart
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 12 users Like TurkeyBurner's post
01-09-2015, 10:15 AM
RE: The REAL Unmoved mover argument; can you challenge the it?
(01-09-2015 05:50 AM)Waves Wrote:  The argument is state here this link: http://imgur.com/pnoaIIC

A fuller version can be found here: https://www.reddit.com/r/cosmologicalargument/

Just the god of the gaps argument combined with special pleading.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like Unbeliever's post
01-09-2015, 10:40 AM
RE: The REAL Unmoved mover argument; can you challenge the it?
The lengths theists go to tap dance around while waving their hands in the air in hubris attempts to persuade themselves and others that the cosmological argument is valid always amuses me. Things exist, thus there must be a creator, thus god....

but wait, what created god Consider why couldn't the universe have existed forever? why MUST there be a creative force? Perhaps Norrg who resides in hollow Neptune mixed unicorn farts with fairy dust in the great sky cauldron to make man......funny how fear drives everything.....the fear of not knowing, thus god. Rather than just comprehending that there are questions we do not yet know the answers to, and may even never know the answers to...this fact shouldn't drive rational intelligent people to make up shit to "fill in the gap".....well shit, I don't know why that exists......ooooh I know...god. Sad really. Rather than applying logic and intelligence by contemplation of what we can observe and know about the laws of the universe....and promulgate a hypothesis, they resort to magic.

More of the same, the flavor of the moment is irrelevant.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
01-09-2015, 10:44 AM
RE: The REAL Unmoved mover argument; can you challenge the it?
Are you missing the axiomatic inference GWG?

[Image: ZF1ZJ4M.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2015, 11:00 AM (This post was last modified: 01-09-2015 11:03 AM by goodwithoutgod.)
RE: The REAL Unmoved mover argument; can you challenge the it?
(01-09-2015 10:44 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Are you missing the axiomatic inference GWG?

At work, firewalls wont let me clicky, but if I get time tonight will check it out to see what the latest spin is. I got homework in both classes due tonight that I haven't even done the required reading for yet Weeping

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2015, 11:03 AM
RE: The REAL Unmoved mover argument; can you challenge the it?
(01-09-2015 11:00 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  
(01-09-2015 10:44 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Are you missing the axiomatic inference GWG?

At work, firewalls wont let me clicky, but if I get time tonight will check it out to see what the latest spin is. I got homework in both classes due tonight that I haven't even done the required reading for yet Weeping

Clap

I summoned the wrath of GWG! I feel like a real prophet now. Big Grin

[Image: ZF1ZJ4M.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like houseofcantor's post
01-09-2015, 11:03 AM
RE: The REAL Unmoved mover argument; can you challenge the it?
why does this argument stink so much of the kalaam and modal ontalogical argument?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Ace's post
01-09-2015, 11:05 AM
RE: The REAL Unmoved mover argument; can you challenge the it?
"Pure act" ... really ?

Define "act" ... and in doing so, use no temporal reference.

LMAO

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Bucky Ball's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: