P2: since these contingent parts will eventually fail to exist, given enough time the universe as a whole should fail to exist p3: the physical universe exists conclusion: thus, something non contingent exists which created the physical (and contingent) universe. Philosophy of religion on the claim that the universe, as a whole, is contingent it is not only the case, the argument suggests, that each of the things around. [dubious - discuss] since the universe could, under different circumstances, conceivably not exist (contingency), its existence must have a cause - not merely another contingent thing, but something that exists by necessity (something that must exist in order for anything else to exist. The controversy in philosophy turns not on whether there is an uncaused first cause, but what qualifies as that first cause — the universe or some other entity. I could get in to them, but for now, all i will say is unless you think it is impossible that our physical universe be any different (ie be another universe) or fail to exist (ie it must be eternal and necessarily eternal), then you think it is contingent.
Sean carroll's preposterous universe whether the universe as a whole or any part of it, don't necessarily have existence there are contingent things in. A universe from nothing: changed the whole fabric of the discussion or maybe even what produced that and whether our universe is one of a multiverse of an. Is the universe made of math [excerpt] it doesn't matter whether you write two plus two equals four, 2 + 2 = 4 or dos mas dos igual a cuatro why do facts fail. Transcript of the russell/copleston radio debate of the whole universe r: we could then have discussed whether that being is personal, good, and so on.
If everything in the universe is contingent, how could the universe as a whole fail to be contingent a thorough analysis of the cosmological argument for the existence of god. Now let's set aside the question of whether that which causes the universe has to be god but how could the contingent universe, or the contingent. A flaw in the cosmological argument is in giving special exclusive status to a deity that would need no creator or origin outside of itself- a necessary being--without acknowledging that such status could be given to the basic stuff, physis, of the universe, its energy, that can take different forms. Causation and the origin of the universe: a response to edward feser for some time now, i've been meaning to respond to a post on edward feser's blog the post is criticism of sean carroll in his.
If we thoroughly investigate the reason for the existence of these contingent things, we will come to see that a necessary being exists that is their cause, and only after that, much further on in the argument, will we see that the material universe as a whole—which we can assume is the universe that russell is referring to—is contingent. Neither the universe as a whole nor any of its entire we have seen that the universe could not pop into existence uncaused from nothing (whether contingent. About preparing contingent causes, i've always found the following analogy useful: in christopher marlowe's doctor faustus, the title character can either repent or fail to repent, but whether or not he repents or fails to repent is still determined by marlowe's will.
Whether typical human brains exist or not, the universe is still there, with as many parallel histories as it happens to have and besides, m-theory multiverse should not be confused with quantum. Ah, the big bang, our most science-y of creation myths and the whole universe was, as the song goes, hot and dense at the moment, we don't know. On the contrary, if even one fact about the universe is contingent, then that's sufficient to make the universe as a whole contingent all the argument from contingency requires is that--somewhere, somehow--things could've been otherwise.
Nothing is the absence of anythingif something could come out of nothing,it would run contrary to everything we have learnt about thee nature of the universe so farthis is why it is absolutely necessary for the universe to have a cause outside time and space. Why something rather than nothing matt fradd then the whole universe must be contingent as well a contingent entity that can fail to exist. A cosmological argument takes some cosmic feature of the universe—such as the existence of contingent things or the fact of motion—that calls out for explanation, and argues that this feature is to be explained in terms of the activity of a first cause, which first cause is.