Cosmological argument?

Question

If you can refute please do I am interested But only serious answers please!
1)Everything that had a begining had a cause
2) The universe had a begining
3) Therefore, the universe had a cause.
As to the personality of the first cause
1)The universe had a first cause
2)This first cause's act to create was either determined,undetermined,or self determined.
3) But it can not be determined because there is nothing before the first cause
4)neither can it be undetermined since that is contrary to the principal of causality
5) Hence,the act to create must have been self determined.
Please give clear reasoning to why( if you do ) disagree.

Didn't I mention serious answers and if you disagreed give reasons? Is that too hard to ask?

Hey guys good discussion so far but I notice some of the answers negate parts of the others. Do we need to break this down into smaller parts for consensus?

It does look like I got something started now. Thank you. The first part is a linear argument based heavily on the second law of thermodynamics and supported by Big Bang theory. I will try to add more as I have time. Look we are all getting to have an intellectual discussion

Reasons that the univers has a beginning. Big Bang theory, Second law of Thermodynamics which affirms that the universe isrunning out of usable energy and is ,therefore not eternal.

Answer 1

Before the Big bang there was a gravitational singularity. The big bang was responsible for the 'creation' of space and time, anything before the big bang(the singularity) is not subject to before, the first cause, physical laws, etc. Therefore, the gravitational singularity is already unbounded by space and time i.e. can also be classified as beyond time, and therefore no creator or first cause is required. The unification between quantum mechanics and general relativity would be the final nail in the coffin for the first cause argument.

If your premise is correct, then who created the creator?...Actually, I don't rule out the possibility of a creator, but the position of creator never point out to any specific religion, The creator may as well be the Flying spaghetti monster or a cereal box. Your process of elimination doesn't work with science. As matter of fact, if there was a creator, then it is actually closer to a deistic god than to Allah or Yahweh.

According to general relativity, a singularity is entirely compressed into a region with zero volume, which means its density and gravitational pull are infinite, and so is the curvature of space-time which it causes. These infinite values cause most physical equations, including Einstein’s general relativity, to stop working at a singularity i.e the gravitational singularity or at the center of a black hole.

Answer 2

This seems to be all semantics and pure human reasoning to me. It's just the way we think - in our daily lives, of course everything has a beginning and a cause! But physics, especially getting into the extremes and quantum stuff, is much less logical and difficult to wrap our brains around. It isn't all a simple line from cause to effect.

Another problem with this argument is that it jumps from "the universe had a cause" to the statement that somehow, the first cause "act[ed] to create," assuming out the blue that it's some kind of sentient force. Where did that assumption come from? Well then, what was the cause of that cause? And so on and so forth - you can go back forever. But if you think in terms outside of time, and thus, outside of cause and effect as we know it, why can't the universe be eternal, forever expanding and collapsing? I dunno if that's right, of course, but it's just a thought.

Answer 3

For those who believe the universe is infinite you may want to check your facts again.
The universe is not eternal from a given point the " big Bang" it is moving away from that point, the universe is expanding and in a few million years plant earth, the sun and moon will have moved away from each other so far that earth will have no life.

Answer 4

Point one is tautological. That is to say, that saying "had a beginning" and "had a cause" is, the way you're using it, literally self-defining. Either would have to be proven independently, and stating the fact is meaningless. So, point one can be ignored.

Point two, however, needs supporting evidence. What led you to the conclusion that the universe had a beginning? At the very least, we need to see your line of reasoning that lead you to this conclusion before your argument could be accepted. Demonstrating your line of reasoning won't guarantee your argument is accepted, but it's the bare minimum. Obviously your argument would have to be sound to begin with before a meaningful refutation can even be made

Point 3 merely rephrases point two, but offers no other evidence or explanation.

Since no strong arguments whatsoever were made to support claims not generally agreed upon to be true, no attempt to was made to show that the universe had a cause, we can conclude the following: Any absolute claim such as the one you have made, "Therefore, the universe had a cause", can only be taken to be opinion, and cannot be presented as a factual argument, which was to be shown as per your request.

Second set of arguments:
Point one should be phrased "If the universe had a first cause", or "Considering a universe that was caused", unless you have conclusive proof or a strong argument. Since this is necessary to even consider any other points, I'm going to take the liberty of responding to that question, rather than the one you asked. Anything past this point, then, is not to be taken as a refutation of your argument, but rather refutation of an argument similar to your argument, but different enough to at least allow for serious discussion, something your argument lacked.

Also, a little clarity as to exactly what you mean by "first cause" would help.

Point 2 can easily be demonstrated to be false. Since there is no universe, and time does not exist, the term "determine" is meaningless; there's no predicting the future, or "determining" the way things are going to be, because there is no future to begin with. If anything happens, it happens at exactly the same moment. Since the terms "undetermined" and "self-determined" also similarly rely upon the same concept, all three are false, and since only one premise needs to be shown to be false for the whole argument to be false, and all three premises have been shown to be false, any argument relying on point two (including your entire argument, by the way, not just the argument I'm responding to) can be proven, beyond a shadow of any doubt, to be completely false.

This is an absolute refutation, and it applies to your original argument as you wrote it, but in the interest of hearing you out, I will continue.

In order to consider argument 3, 2 needs to be fixed before we can continue. Again, this is creating an argument now two steps removed from your argument. The phrasing of point two for this argument is "The universe was either caused by something other than itself, or contained, within the span of time and space, a means of creating itself".

Moving on to argument 3:
Argument 3 is actually completely sound. Nothing within the universe can determine anything before the existence of the universe, since there is no "before the universe" :D

Argument 4:
Argument 4, on the other hand, is completely false. Since the term "before the universe" is meaningless, the phrase "there is not anything that existed before the universe that caused the universe to be" is demonstrably, and completely true. Again, this still allows for a strange "outside the universe" concept, but stays consistent with point 3, in which you insisted there was no "before the universe" for things to be in.

Argument 5: Using your argument, this is untrue; you would have to have a complete list to work from in point 2 before you can make a deductive claim like this in point 5, which you clearly don't have.

Using my argument, this is untrue as well; my version of point two split everything into two categories, things within the set of things that could be described as "the universe", and things outside that set. While both our arguments rely on the assumption that there is no "before" the universe, mine allows for things existing alongside the universe creating our universe, and it's equally feasable that either occured.

Therefore, it can be proven that neither of us knows what caused the universe, and it cannot be determined that "the act to create must have been self determined", which was to be shown as per your request.

Answer 5

1) not true, but just for a moment, let's pretend it is, accept it and move onto 2
2) not true. the universe is infinite. it always has been. it has no beginning.

this negates the rest of the argument

even so, let's move on assuming 2 is true.

3) IF 2 were true, this would be also.

onto the "personality"

well, right there the argument breaks down again. you assume it must be a "personality," a sentient being. this is not a valid assumption whatsoever, even if your 1st 3 claims were true (which they're not).

so no matter how many different ways we look at it, this argument fails and fails miserably.

Answer 6

both premises are false or at least not established with any certainty. events whose cause is unknown or possibly fundamentally uncaused happen all the time - for example radioactive decay. the universe may or may not have had a beginning at the big bang - there are many models, some of which posit pre-existing entities. the evidence is so far not really good enough to distinguish between models.

Answer 7

Everyone was in confusion, the confusion had a couse. That confusion had a beginning as man wasn't witness to the greater realities of this world. What is God Almighty informed us is clear and well said. Rest all are confusing including your question. Thank you sir.

Answer 8

I will not answer your question "point for point" only to say your logic is correct as far as we can imply.

In the Qu'ran it is said many time the the unanswerable questions, such as this one, in all subjects will be learned by all and thus decided in Paradise. Those in the Pit shall also continually wonder and argue...just like now.

Answer 9

"Everything that had a begining had a cause"
Unproven assumption. At the quantum level, cause and effect may not apply. A quantum variation may have been all that was necessary to set the universe in motion.

Answer 10

Let me ask you, what was before the first cause or the universe. I know I won't get an answer. Therefore I believe in God.