A map of reasons and replies
Did the Universe “begin to exist”?
Trace the strongest lines of support, challenge each claim, and follow every response as far as the reasoning goes.
Start with an argumentsupporting
challenging
-
Clarifying the question
Question: Did the Universe “begin to exist,” in the sense used by philosopher William Lane Craig? This notion is analyzed as follows (note: iff reads as if and only if):
“…where ‘x’ ranges over any entity and ‘t’ ranges over times, whether instants or moments of nonzero finite duration: A. x begins to exist at t iff x comes into being at t. B. x comes into being at t iff (i) x exists at t, and the actual world includes no state of affairs in which x exists timelessly, (ii) t is either the first time at which x exists or is separated from any t′ < t at which x existed by an interval during which x does not exist, and (iii) x’s existing at t is a tensed fact.” [“The Kalam Cosmological Argument” in The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology (Blackwell, 2010), 194.] (Emphasis added)
-
The number of previous events is not actually infinite
The Universe's existing has a finite-past (Or: The serried number of events earlier than now are merely finite in quantity).
This is relevant because if the number of events earlier than now are merely finite, then there must be a first event (as defined in the introduction).
-
The Big Bang model is true
The standard Hot Big Bang model is true. This is relevant because if the Hot Big Bang model is true, then at some finite point in the past, the Universe suddenly came into existence (thereby beginning to exist).
-
The number of past events are infinite
The Universe's existing has an infinite-past (Or: The serried number of events earlier than now are infinite in quantity). This is relevant because if the past serried number of events are infinite, then there is no first event, and so presumably there is no beginning.
-
[The B-theory of time is true]
[Brackets] mean “Forthcoming.”
The B-theory of time is true. This is relevant because it would mean that any coming into being of the Universe would be a “tenseless fact.” (This in turn is relevant because Craig analyzes “begins to exist” in a way that requires the fact reporting the Universes' coming into being to be a tensed fact).
-
The Universe has no beginning “point”
The initial cosmic singularity is merely a point on the boundary of space-time, rather than a first temporal point in it This relevant because if the Universe has no beginning point, then arguably it has no beginning.
But, so what if there is no beginning point? Couldn't it still be that a past event nevertheless occupies a first duration (i.e. nonzero finite temporal interval which was absolutely first—not preceded by any equal interval.)? This would be sufficient for the Universe having a beginning.1
- • William Lane Craig: “Intuitively, time begins to exist just in case for any arbitrarily selected, non-zero, finite interval of time, there are only a finite number of isochronous intervals earlier than it. [Critics] have failed to learn the lesson of the ancient Greek paradoxes of stopping and starting. For if an object O is at rest at time t but in motion at some time t* > t , then, given the continuity of time, there is no first instant of O's motion, and yet, pace Parmenides, O did begin to move.” [A Companion to the Philosophy of Religion 2nd. (Ed. Taliaferro, Draper, Quinn (Blackwell, 2010), 540.]