Reply to thread

Ah well, where do I start. The arguments are so fundamentally flawed.


Well, I'll let you have bash with this objection and give you some more once you've dealt with this one.


The argument is not a posteriori, as Aquinas claimed it was, because it is not based on observation and proof. Until I find someone who experienced the Prime Mover and the start of the universe. Therefore, it will have to be taken as an unproved given based on some kind of flawed logic that there was a first uncaused cause, thus making it a priori.


Please, please, please keep the technical terms to an absoloute minimum, for the sake of my understanding!


Back
Top