Abstract
AbstractI explain how philosophy, science and theology can continue to work together concerning the issue of ultimate origins. In reply to the objection that we should try to find a scientific explanation rather than accepting the conclusion of design, the KCA-TA demonstrates that the ultimate explanation cannot be a scientific one, because the first event must have been brought about by a First Cause with libertarian freedom and not by a mechanism describable by a law of nature. Moreover, the KCA-TA is not a God-of-the-gaps argument because it is not based on gaps in our understanding which can be filled by further progress in science. Rather, the KCA-TA is based on reasons. For example, it is because there are reasons for thinking that an infinite regress of causes is impossible, therefore there must be a First Cause. While the progress of science would generate newer theories to explain various aspects of the physical world, it would not replace the First Cause (Creator) as the ultimate explanation for why the physical world exists in the first place, as demonstrated by the KCA-TA.
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Reference28 articles.
1. Baggett, David, and Jerry Walls. 2016. God and Cosmos: Moral Truth and Human Meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2. Boddy, K.K., S.M. Carroll, and J. Pollack. 2016. De Sitter Space Without Dynamical Quantum Fluctuations. Found Phys 46: 702–735.
3. Bostrom, Nick. 2003. Are We Living in a Computer Simulation? Philosophical Quarterly 53 (211): 243–255.
4. Carrier, Richard. 2003. Fundamental Flaws in Mark Steiner’s Challenge to Naturalism in The Applicability of Mathematics as a Philosophical Problem. The Secular Web. https://infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/steiner.html.
5. Copan, Paul, and William Lane Craig, eds. 2017. The Kalām Cosmological Argument. 2 Vols. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.