tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31835720.post2233121375746266799..comments2023-05-20T07:46:10.187-07:00Comments on ex-apologist: Modal Epistemology and Creation Ex Nihiloexapologisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09915579495149582531noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31835720.post-2660130990066214052015-07-01T17:51:45.664-07:002015-07-01T17:51:45.664-07:00HI Luke,
I'm still not sure I see the problem...HI Luke,<br /><br />I'm still not sure I see the problem. Aquinas' famous example of an essentially ordered series is a stone moved by a stick, which in turn is moved by a man. Why is this ruled out by the impossibility of the creation of concrete objects ex nihilo? On a related note, I've argued elsewhere that the same conclusion goes through for sustaining causes. So, for example, the continued existence of a flame appears to require a material cause, viz., reacting gasses and solids. Remove the latter, and the flame vanishes. This is true even if the flame is past-eternal.<br /><br />Best,<br />EAexapologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09915579495149582531noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31835720.post-57369975194015973312015-06-29T11:49:28.690-07:002015-06-29T11:49:28.690-07:00Well, your PEC focuses on "concrete objects&q...Well, your PEC focuses on "concrete objects" coming into existence <i>ex nihilo</i>. Causation seemed to be subordinate to matter[–energy]. But suppose that you actually mean "concrete objects" <i>and</i> "causation". That would seem to indicate that either:<br /><br /> (1) there is no causation<br /> (2) all causal series are infinite<br /><br />Is there a (3)?Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18395549142176242491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31835720.post-27716856792616022822015-06-29T11:33:53.755-07:002015-06-29T11:33:53.755-07:00Sorry, I should've been more specific. I'm...Sorry, I should've been more specific. I'm trying to get clear on the difference between creation ex nihilo and causation ex nihilo. <br /><br />Best,<br />EAexapologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09915579495149582531noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31835720.post-62505768607993014182015-06-29T11:26:47.415-07:002015-06-29T11:26:47.415-07:00Your post here is skeptical about getting matter e...Your post here is skeptical about getting matter <i>ex nihilo</i>. I'm wondering if you have the same skepticism against causation <i>ex nihilo</i>. If we prohibit both, and accept the Thomistic conclusion, then that would seem to lead to the claim that there are no essentially ordered series. Are you comfortable with that claim?Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18395549142176242491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31835720.post-29622127954013036052015-06-28T13:24:54.819-07:002015-06-28T13:24:54.819-07:00I'm not sure I follow.I'm not sure I follow.exapologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09915579495149582531noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31835720.post-20322360341934015262015-06-18T00:43:23.956-07:002015-06-18T00:43:23.956-07:00Is causation ex nihilo any more palatable than mat...Is causation <i>ex nihilo</i> any more palatable than matter <i>ex nihilo</i>?Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18395549142176242491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31835720.post-65410505156436246532015-06-17T22:52:35.107-07:002015-06-17T22:52:35.107-07:00Hi Luke,
I'm not sure I yet see their incompa...Hi Luke,<br /><br />I'm not sure I yet see their incompatibility. So, for example, grant the Thomistic conclusion. Given the presumption against PEC, one would then conclude that the uncaused cause of the first element produced the series from prior things or stuff, such as from the substance of the uncaused cause itself. <br /><br />Best,<br />EAexapologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09915579495149582531noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31835720.post-88538754466605436032015-06-17T22:12:38.063-07:002015-06-17T22:12:38.063-07:00Have you considered the scholastic claim that esse...Have you considered the scholastic claim that essentially ordered series cannot be infinite, thus requiring a first element? I wonder if denial of PEC is tantamount to denial that any series is essentially ordered. If it is, then giving up essentially ordered series seems like it might be a big sacrifice.Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18395549142176242491noreply@blogger.com