Hume criticisms of the causation arguments
1) The causal principle
"Everything has a cause" - This is not analytic
--> Not certain and we can deny it without contradicting ourselves
We also have no experience of such things as the beginnings of the universe
--> Cannot relate our human causation to the universe
2) Is a first cause necessary?
Is an infinite regress really impossible?
To say there cannot be an infinite regress is NOT ANALYTIC NOR DO WE HAVE EXPIERENCE TO KNOW THIS.
--> We can conceive of something existing forever, so an infinite regress is possible
3) Is the first cause really God?
The arguments from causation don't defend well the claim that God is really the first cause
Cannot infer God is the first cause as it is not analytic and also not known by expierence
Comments
No comments have yet been made