Q&A: Infinite Regression Does Not Constitute an Explanation
Infinite Regression Does Not Constitute an Explanation
Question
When you say that an infinite regression does not constitute an explanation, do you mean that it does not provide an explanation in the same way that the laws of nature do not provide an explanation? That is, just as we can ask about the laws of nature themselves why they exist, so too regarding the chain of causes we would have to ask why there is any chain of causes at all, why there is existence at all rather than nothingness.
If so, it would seem that accepting an infinite regression does not contradict the existence of God, but only postpones the question.
Answer
An infinite regression is not in itself an explanation, not only because it itself cannot be justified. Moreover, any justification of it merely adds another link to the infinite chain and leaves us with an infinite chain, and therefore adds nothing to the logic of the problem.
Discussion on Answer
An infinite regression too is cut off with a link that itself does not require an explanation. This discussion is not going anywhere. If you want to continue, bring an example and we can discuss it.
Why does justifying it merely add another link and leave us with an infinite chain? Seemingly, the only way to justify it would be by means of an initial independent cause (which does not itself need justification), and that way we would cut off the chain..