Q&A: The Proof from Causality for the Existence of God
The Proof from Causality for the Existence of God
Question
I read what you write about the proof for the existence of God from causality: that in order not to fall into an infinite regress, we need to apply causality only to things familiar to us. But I didn’t understand one point. After all, David Hume showed that causality does not come from an observational source. If so, why should the scope of the principle of causality apply only to things known to us from experience?
Answer
First, it is known to us from experience. Not through the senses, but through the mind’s eye. See my columns on intuition.
Second, if I need to qualify the principle of causality, I prefer to qualify it regarding things that are outside my experience. Because regarding the things within my experience, I know that there is causality there (from my intuition).
In short, you need to ask yourself whether you accept the principle of causality, and why. If you do not accept it at all, then the discussion cannot even begin. If you do accept it, then why? Because your intuition tells you that this is how the world operates here. So it tells you that this speaks about the world familiar to us. Therefore, if you want to make an exception for something, it is reasonable that it would be something not from our world.