Page 13 - GALIET ARGUMENTUM DIVINUM: Ergo IV

something else, and thus, successively. Because an infinite regression of causes is inconceivable to most, both, Aristotle and Aquinas, conclude that a first cause of motion must exist which is not moved: the unmoved first mover. Not only does this argument try to prove that an unmoved first cause exists, but it also tries to associate it with the God of theism: a Supreme Personal Being who is omniscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent.
However, this connection between “first-cause” and a “theistic- God,” is fallacious, according to Kurtz, since it doesn’t necessarily follow that the first mover of the Universe is the God of Theism and vice-versa. Moreover, Kurtz argues that, because the universe is an open system which includes individual systems and subsystems, “not all possible causal systems came into operation in all parts of the Universe.”5 Of this trilogy of arguments, the Cosmological Argument is the least convincing. As Kurtz validly posits, there might have existed an unmoved first cause for each of these alternative universes moving at different times or planes. Moreover, it is not so far-fetched to abstractly conceive of an infinite series of causes even if we weren’t aware of the Big-Bang theory. For the Cosmological Argument to be valid, we need to agree with
5 Kurtz, Paul. The Transcendental Temptation. Chapter XI. Does Go Exist? New York: Prometheus Books, 1991. 295.
• 13 •