cause and effect is logic

Hi vi_spex, Before I begin, I would like to state my approach in explaining why this argument is false: 1. The argument "cause and effect is logic" suggests that "Every effect has a cause. This also means that every cause has a cause." I will attempt in this debate to prove that "Not every cause has a cause". If I succeed in proving this point, my opponent’s argument would be refuted. vi_spex agreed to these rules. (see messages) 2. We both share the burden of proof. I have to prove that it’s not true, and my opponent has to prove that it’s true. Any claim that the argument is true because the other can't prove it to be false (or vice verse) is considered an argument from ignorance. 3. We must view this argument from a realistic, logical and rational perspective. We must put aside our assumptions, biases, presuppositions and world views. Does every event require a preceding event causing it? I say no. Here's why. 1. Premise A: Every event either has a preceding event causing it or not (Null Hypothesis) 2. Premise B: There is a finite number of past events. 3. Let e(x) represent event x in set of all events E (i.e. Let E be a set of all events e(1), e(2), e(3) ... e(n)) 4. Now choose any event in the set of events and make it e(x). Using Recursive process (inductive logic) 5. Does event e(x) have a preceding event e(y)? 6. If no – i.e. e(y) doesn't exist? Then e(x) is an event without a preceding event. End of proof 7. If yes – i.e. e(y) does exist? Then take e(x) out from the set of event. So now the size of set E is reduced by 1. 8. Make e(x) now be the preceding event e(y). 9. Repeat steps 5 to 9. If after a maximum of n-1 iterations we still didn't find an event without a preceding event, the size of set E will become 1. Now think of this for a second. If there's only one event left in the set, then there are no other events that could precede it. This proves my point that this final event will be an event without a preceding event. End of proof. Conclusion: I used this exact logic in a different debate. The logic above, if the premises are true, concludes that there must exist at least 1 cause which was uncaused. There's no escape from this conclusion. This conclusion refutes your argument. To explain what I did above in layman's terms... If you look at any event, and then go to its preceding event, to its preceding event, and so on... Because there's a finite number of events, you will definitely and necessarily reach an event that doesn't have a preceding event. The only possible challenge that you can have against this argument, is to argue premise 2. Specifically, what if there's an infinite number of past events? I will defend premise 2 below. Can there be an infinite number of past events? I say no. Here's why. When we say past events… these are events that have already occurred. So to prove my point, I'll first assume that there is an infinite number of past events (Null Hypothesis) and show how that's impossible. Please note that infinity ∞ doesn't really exist. It's only a potential abstract concept. Many make the mistake that it's a number, and that's not true. Here are some peculiar properties of ∞: - ∞ + 1 = ∞ - ∞ x 786 = ∞ - ∞ + ∞ = ∞ - What's most important is that you can't say that ∞ = ∞, ∞ ≠ ∞, ∞ > ∞ or ∞ < ∞ But there's another way to illustrate this in laymen's term. (This was illustrated by German's great mathematician's David Hilbert). Imagine that there is a hotel with an infinite number of rooms. And that the hotel was full. Every room was taken! Now someone comes to the hotel and says: "Excuse me. Is there a room for me?" The owner of the hotel will say "Yes of course!" How? Well, you ask the tenant of room 1 to go to room 2, tenant of room 2 to go to room 3...etc. Guess what! Room 1 is now vacant. Let's say that an infinite number of new tenants want to enter the hotel. The owner again will say "Of course! Why not..." So he asks everyone in room 1 to go to room 2, room 2 to 4, 3 to 6...etc. Now all even numbered rooms have been taken, and all odd numbered rooms are available (Infinite of them)! Now the infinite number of new tenants have available rooms for them! What's even more insane is that if there's another hotel, with also an infinite number of tenants. Which of the two owners have more tenants? Well... it's neither more, nor less, nor the same. So basically, the basic laws of math fail with infinities. Because infinities are potential values, but can never be achieved. No matter how much you add to a number, you will never reach infinity. Since past events actually occurred, then it's impossible that there is an infinite number of past events. Conclusion I was not trying to prove in this debate that every cause has an effect, or every effect was caused. I agree with this. What I argued was that the argument "cause and effect is logic" suggests that "Every effect has a cause, which also means that every cause has a cause." My opponent agreed that his argument would be refuted if I am able to prove that "Not every cause has a cause". The logic above confirms my assertion that there must exist at least one uncaused cause.