Chap wrote:Socrates wrote:Are you saying that until someone can comprehend the true nature of infinity, no beginning and no end, he will be hopelessly searching for an infinite regression of pre-creations? Vainly seeking a point in time at which something appeared from nothing?
Are you saying infinity has a 'true nature'? I did not say or assume that.
If you want to do the Socratic elenchus on me, are you not supposed to start from some assertion or assumption that I have made? I can remember that from the accounts that your young friend with the broad shoulders left us of your conversations.
Socrates wrote:Why do you consider the existence of the universe problematic?
Good try, but I am not sure that I do want to say that I consider the existence of the universe 'problematic'. That is for two reasons:
1. Its existence is certainly not problematic to me in the sense of my being troubled by any serious doubt about
whether it exists.
2. I am not sure whether it makes any sense to ask
why the universe exists, if by 'universe' you intend to name the set that includes
everything - that is, roughly speaking all things that could in principle be objects of experience, whether direct or indirect. Since most people would feel uncomfortable in being told that something was the reason for its own existence, it would seem that for such people the reason for the existence of the universe would have to lie outside the universe. But that would contradict our assumption about what the universe is. So it seems that the question asked may be nonsensical. As I have already said:
It is more economical to say that there appear to be some questions we cannot answer.
The reason for our not being able to answer a question may be because we are too ignorant, but it can also be that the question is such as not to have an answer (Such as 'What odd number between 1 and 100 is divisible by two?'.). I suspect that may be the case for this question.