Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Cosmological argument in 1st order logic?

  1. May 15, 2010 #1
    So I've been discussing this alleged proof with another person, and I was wondering what are the issues with Dr. William S. Hatcher's proposal. His entire process can be found http://www.onecountry.org/e102/e10214xs.htm", but it can be summed up into three axioms

    1) Principle of sufficient reason: everything in the universe is either preceded by a cause or else contains within itself a sufficient reason for its existence.

    2) Potency principle: for every system or composite phenomenon, any cause for the system is also a cause for every part of the system. (Every material thing, except possibly the elementary particles of quantum physics, is composite.)

    3) Principle of limitation: the existence of a whole system cannot precede the existence of its components (or, he writes, "the constitution of a whole obviously supposes and depends upon the prior or simultaneous existence of its components.")​

    Personally I find it convincing to proof an universal uncaused cause (which Hatcher calls God though not one demonstrably affiliated with any religion). So what are your thoughts?

    Note: I highly recommend reading his work rather than just basing it on the axioms presented here. It gives a more complete picture of his reasoning.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2017
  2. jcsd
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Can you offer guidance or do you also need help?
Draft saved Draft deleted