© 2008 Antonio Moya, Carmelo Martínez, Andrés Pérez, Santiago Rodríguez
© 2008 Urantia Association of Spain
| Luz y Vida — No. 14 — Presentation | Luz y Vida — No. 14 — September 2008 — Index | Prayer for every night |
By various authors
Participants:
- Antonio Moya
- Carmelo Martínez
- Andrés Pérez
- Santiago Rodríguez
Antonio: here is a good question: “Universal causes (or of the universe) cannot be inferior to universal effects (or of the universe)” (UB 3:6.3)
Why can’t an effect be superior to its cause? Explain it to me, please. One is a bit clumsy, and does not quite envision good examples of this statement. I like bib examples for children, because if not, I still don’t get anything. Would someone be kind enough to shed a little light on my thick head? Thanks in advance.
“all effects are preceded by definite causes.” (UB 86:2.5)
“You cannot have effects without causes;” (UB 102:7.3)
Carmelo: Antonio’s questions… as always, sharp, deep and difficult to answer.
I am going to try to do it by reflecting aloud, and using the method of the contrary proposition, in this case, looking for an effect that is greater than its cause, if there is one.
For example, a huge snow avalanche. Apparently it is caused by any small variation in its stability: a stone that rolls, a branch that breaks… Well, we already have an effect much greater than its cause… apparently. But the true cause of the avalanche is not the small variation, but the enormous weight of the snow, that is, the force of gravity; the pebble is only the trigger, not the true cause. There would be no avalanche if there was not a force large enough to move the entire mass of snow.
I interpret the cause-effect chain thinking that you cannot give what you do not have. If we go back from the final effect to its immediate cause, and then to the cause of the cause, and so on until we reach the first cause, each effect will obtain at most what its cause has, and no more. Therefore no effect will have more (of whatever it has) than its cause has.
In engineering this phenomenon is measured by what is called “performance.” An engine, for example, does not deliver all the energy it consumes; there is always a return less than one. The most that can be expected is that the performance is one (something unrealizable in practice); of course, a yield greater than one is inherently impossible.
And I take the opportunity to put a “wedge”. It is not difficult for materialistic science to accept that “you cannot have effects without causes” and that by going up the chain you will arrive at a first cause. What materialism denies is that this first cause is what we call First Source and Center. I, who have been a materialist, and who in many ways still am, understand that it is natural and even healthy that the existence of God is unprovable. Faith is the basis of (true) religion, and true religion, the personal relationship with the Father, is the basis of spiritual growth (and the living of action that this implies) which is what will lead us to Him. Santi wrote an excellent article on this.
Antonio: So let’s get to the heart of the matter. From a simply rational, logical and human point of view, and even philosophical, (but not religious, and much less according to the L.d.U.), is the Universe a cause, or is it an effect? Because? Take it down for me please.
Carmelo: What a question Antonio throws at us. I’ve been thinking about it and I’m not sure. Nor do I remember that in the little philosophy that I have read the subject is dealt with. So I’m going to drop my personal reflections.
From the point of view of its components, the universe seems to me to be an immensity of cause-effect chains, since the effects themselves are in turn causes of other effects, or what is the same, that the causes are in turn effects. from other causes.
In a materialist conception and from the global point of view, that is, seeing the universe as a whole, it is neither cause nor effect. Or at least that would seem to me. It exists, period. To consider it an effect, we must necessarily assume a previous cause, first cause or cause without a cause, whatever we want to call it. And furthermore, this cause must be external to the universe itself. I don’t see how the universe seen as a whole could be considered a cause; cause of what?
Putting it in a slightly different way, from the point of view of reason for the universe to be an effect there must be a cause that is not the universe itself. For the universe to be a cause, there must be an effect other than the universe itself. It is not irrational to consider that the universe has no cause and is not itself the cause of anything. Come on, it is neither cause nor effect, it exists and nothing else.
The question surprised me and I don’t know if I understood it correctly. What is going through your head, Antonio?
Antonio: What goes through my head is very simple: The L.d.U. affirms that the universe is an effect. And I just wanted to know if it can be proven by our reasoning, or by whatever method, but regardless of what revelation or religion says, whether the universe is, according to us, a cause or an effect. What does it look like to us, regardless of what religion says? Let’s see if we can match one thing and another, but by different methods. Voilà all!
Santiago: Official science “gets nervous” when it has to work with infinities. In our observable universe everything seems to be the cause and/or consequence of something. Science seems to admit that neither time nor space are infinite, but that they have a limit and even put a stop to it (the big bang) in time.
Science seems to be clear that nothing is created or destroyed, only transformed. If the cosmos is finite (in time and/or in space), it seems logical to deduce that there had to be a first event, as the cause of everything. Since science does not even want to consider that this first event was a will, it must be something physical, but dead. This inevitably leads him to have to deal with infinities of energy and others, which he knows are not logical, and he ends up saying that he possibly does not know enough to explain.
It seems logical to me to think that, if this is the case, there must have been a first cause, which science cannot accept as infinite. I do not see the possibility of events that are not the cause and/or consequence of something (or someone).
Carmelo: I don’t think it’s possible to prove that the universe is the effect of anything (or the cause of anything), neither by reasoning nor by any other method. I have the impression, although I no longer follow the evolution of science so closely, that it has adopted a neutral position in this regard; that is, to affirm that it cannot demonstrate if the universe has a cause (finite or infinite) and that in fact it does not matter, that scientific development can be followed assuming that the universe exists without further ado.
I don’t think you can find an incontestable reasoning about it. In short, the matter is purely a matter of faith and “intuition.”
Andrés: I believe that the cause can never be greater than the effect, especially with our very primary system that we are constituted, because if that were the case, fear would be much more influential in us, that is, we would be more “scared of”. »That what we already are, that is why the effect has to be less than the cause, so that we can correct that difference, and thus we can understand that there is a solution to any difficulty and learn from mistakes.
Trying to understand God’s thoughts is an effect for us mortals, because I don’t think we can understand the cause today. But let’s assume a hypothesis. We all believe that God is LOVE, pure Love, according to my concept of love, one cannot be alone because if not towards whom do you develop that feeling. God in the beginning of the “beginning” had a thought and developed it through all created beings until it reached us and the animals as well as the plants, with the purpose of being entertained and entertained “eternally”. I can’t find any other cause today.
¶ References
- Light and Life Magazine (all old issues): https://aue.urantia-association.org/numeros-antiguos-del-lyv/
| Luz y Vida — No. 14 — Presentation | Luz y Vida — No. 14 — September 2008 — Index | Prayer for every night |