Here is an interesting argument:

"Let V be the collection (universe) of all existing entities. Since V is composite it cannot be self-caused (see above) and so must have a cause G (different fromV itself). Thus, G -> V, G != V Moreover, every existing phenomenon A is either an entity, and thus a component of V, or else a system all of whose components are in V -- in which case A is a subsystem of V. Thus, G is either a component or a subsystem of V. But, in either case, G -> G by the potency principle. Thus, G is self-caused and hence noncomposite (no composite can be self-caused as shown above). Finally, since G -> V and every phenomenon A is a part of V then by the potency principle, G is a universal cause (the cause of every existing phenomenon, including itself).

"Finally, we show that G is the only uncaused phenomenon, for suppose there is another such phenomenon G'. Then G -> G' (since G is a universal cause). But since G' is self-caused it cannot be other-caused by the principle of sufficient reason. Thus, G = G' and the uniqueness of G is established."

Here is a link to the relevant section from Dr. Hatcher's book, Love, Power, and Justice: The Dynamics of Authentic Morality:

http://www.onecountry.org/e102/e10214xs.htm

It took all of five minutes to prove that Dr. Hatcher is out of his gourd:

If G -> V and V = A^infinity, then G = V.
Thus, G is composite and cannot cause itself.
G is not a universal cause.

(If A^infinity does not suit you, then try A^all that exists.)

‹ Democracy is PlutocracyupEthical Standards ›