Q&A: The Laws of the Universe — Is It Possible They Existed Eternally?
The Laws of the Universe — Is It Possible They Existed Eternally?
Question
Following the debate, why can’t one argue that the laws of nature have existed forever, and that they stop the infinite regress of things that require a cause?
I saw your answer that every law requires a legislator. But I still don’t understand… because the laws are not matter; they are true of matter, like the law of gravity.
So with regard to the physico-theological argument [which does not deal with the fundamental question of why the universe itself needs a cause—that is what the cosmological proof addresses], let’s say that matter was created at some stage against the background of abstract laws that had existed forever. And through the combination of matter and the laws, the world and everything we know came into being. These laws are God [who stops the regress].
We need to stop the regress with something we don’t know. Why don’t the laws of nature fit that definition? We know them very well… they act on us… but they are not matter, so why would they need a cause?
I’d be happy for a detailed explanation, because I’ve struggled with this for a long time [even before I heard the debate].
Answer
These matters are explained in detail in my book The First Existent.
I did not say that only matter requires a cause. On the contrary: I said that everything requires a cause unless it is the first link in the chain. There, there is some sort of entity, and that is God. He is the sole exception to the principle of causality.
The question is whether the laws of nature are entities (not whether they are matter). If so, and they created the world, then they are God. If they are not entities, then they are not the cause of anything. They merely describe a mode of conduct, but there must be an efficient cause—the one that created the laws and is actually responsible for their operation.
Discussion on Answer
The entity that began the chain is defined as God. I didn’t say anything at all about what it is. Whether it is a law (what would that even mean?), a demon, or a flying spaghetti monster.
You wrote: “The question is whether the laws of nature are entities (not whether they are matter). If so, and they created the world, then they are God.”
A. So is it possible to argue that a set of certain laws—really forces, in essence—have existed forever, and that they are “God”?
B. Is that plausible?
C. Can that explain the entire formation of the universe? That is, can it also explain how matter came into being?