Ledrox

Hello, I am referring to Quentin Smith's essay " Causation and the Logical Impossibilty of a Divine Cause" at <a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/quentin_smith/causation.html" target="_blank">http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/quentin_smith/causation.html</a>

Interestingly, the conclusion that God as a cause is incoherent may have been anticipated around 2000 years ago by the Greek Neo-Platonic philosopher Plotinus and heretical Christian sects that believed in emanation, rather than creation. Plotinus held that God does not really create anything but that the universe emanates from him like a ray of light emanates from its source. Other heretical Christian and Muslim sects of the past held that matter was eternal and was only fashioned by God. Plato himself held that the Demiurge fashioned pre-existing matter according to the transcendent, timeless Forms. Modern process theology rejects the idea of an immutable transcendent God and holds that God is changing and that he exists in space and time. Gnosticism posited that the universe was actually created by a malevolent spirit that was created by God. However, these notions are at odds with classical theology which is examined in the essay.

Anyone care to comment?

Automaton

I fail to see how this "emanation" is any different from creation- a light source in fact creates photons. If the universe eminates from God, can it not be said that God is the cause of the universe?
The notion of eternal matter is conflicted by the second law of thermodynamics, and empirical observations confirming Big Bang cosmology.
A fun fairy tale, but hardly relevant to anything.
So "God" is indistinguishable from a vastly powerful extra-terrestrial? Does this mean God created at the moment of the Big Bang as well? Does he just exist arbitrarily, or was he formed by a creative process such as evolution?
This just shifts a benevolent God with a malevolent "God", and makes no real difference to the argument.
Yes. Good post, but what, exactly, was your point?

Ledrox

Thanks for your reply, Automaton.

The point was that the concept of a divine cause originating the universe being incoherent may have been anticipated by Plotinus and others, which may have been why they posited alternative ideas. I do not know whether my assessment is accurate or not.

If anyone has any knowledge about these different speculations in history, please let me know.

My post was meant to draw attention to some historical interest in philosophical doctrines, it's not an argument for the existence of a deity.

Automaton

No problem.
It's very doubtful, because this idea of "emination" is opposed to creation, not causation. Gnostics believed in a divine, although evil, cause. The others could have possibly anticipated it, but it is more likely they thought so for different reasons (especially Plato.)
Alright, I see. I know you were not arguing for a deity, I was just responding to the various positions as a matter of general interest.

WJ

Led!

As you indicated, I think that one idea or concept that evolved from Plato was the notion of a timeless Being, existing outside the logical confines of cosmology and or part of the whole metaphysical debate. I suppose that's what is meant by 'incoherent', but have not read that piece.

To, I believe that the main issue (causation) will always be relative to consciousness. That is, how does consciousness evolve from inert matter? (Maybe that's not an important question, but one still has to wonder what's the point of wondering about it; ie, inventing a particular position on it?)

Nevertheless, the central question is whether the world (consciousness) is rational. If it isn't, then 'incoherence' itself is a moot point. And if it is, then there would be answers to our/your question(s). I suppose time will tell... ?

Walrus <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

Automaton

Is anyone else wondering what on earth WJ just said? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

hinduwoman

I think WJ means that though the universe might have consciousness, it might not follow the same logic as human brains.

If that is not what he is saying then I am as well.

Ledrox

Hi,

I too am puzzled at what WJ is saying. I understood the first paragraph but not the second.

I don't see what consciousness arising from matter has to do with the logical impossibility of a divine cause of the universe.

I would suggest to WJ to read Quentin Smith's essay. It would help in order to get a good grasp of what my topic was about.