cause and effect cant happen exactly simultaneously.
heh
, I read wrongly, I thought you said “cause and effect
can happen simultaneously”
I’m glad that we agree that for A to cuase B, A cannot occur after B, or at the same time as B.
I’d rather not go back to the OP, if we do, we’ll just end up in the same position we are right now, just 4-6 posts in the future.
i would, i am not trying to cover basic metaphysics, this OP is about sciences ability to provide a natural explanation. the current course of the conversation doesnt seem to make a difference in regard to that. it doesnt seem to affect the premise or conclusion of the OP.
The op says, paraphrased “the universe was caused by something”. So my objection regarding the meaningless of saying the word “cause” in relation to the start of the universe invalidates this claim. And also your argument, as it relies on this claim.
We seem to be at an impasse. I’ll state my position and what I think your position is, and see what you think.
me:
(1)the cause of an effect occurs prior to it, →
(2)Therefore, the concept of cause requires the existence of time. →
why do you think there is a causal relationship between causality and time?
This is not what I am saying. I am not saying “Causality caused time to exist” or “time caused causality to exist”. It is illogical to say “X caused causality to exist”, because causality does not exist for X to cause something.
aside from what seems to be contradictory evidence, it would seem to be difficult then for the BB to have occured at all, if causality requires time, and time began in the BB, then how did the BB occur?
By some process that does not involve the existence of cause. i.e. nothing is caused, and nothing is uncaused. “cause” means nothing. Saying the word “cause” is the same as saying “flibbedy flobbedy floo”. It just doesn’t relate to anything, it is meaningless.
quoteTherefore, If time does not exist, cause can not exist. →
maybe you have some evidence of this? it precludes anything from happening at all.
