One of Thomas Aquinas' proofs for the existence of God is the argument from motion. In this argument he shows how there are things in motion and they must be put in motion by something else that is in motion (we can't have unmoved movers and things that are act and potentiality at the same time). After this, he shows that a chain of motion forms. This, then, could lead to an infinite regress. But, he argues, we can't have an infinite regress because then we would never get to a prime, unmoved mover. My issue is with the infinite regress. Why is it that we can't allow for an infinite regress?
For example, someone could argue that the universe is a long chain of causes and effects of motion. This could go all the way back to the big bang. And the big bang could just be a result of an implosion from the universe before. Or, rather, the universe could be an infinite of constant expanding and imploding over and over again. Why is it that we can't allow for this?
For example, someone could argue that the universe is a long chain of causes and effects of motion. This could go all the way back to the big bang. And the big bang could just be a result of an implosion from the universe before. Or, rather, the universe could be an infinite of constant expanding and imploding over and over again. Why is it that we can't allow for this?