Wednesday 7 August 2019

Axor And Tipler

Poul Anderson's Fr Axor searches for evidence of an extraterrestrial divine incarnation whereas Frank Tipler, if I understand him, argues that there is only one Incarnation but also that the Singularity is the First Cause and God, which would obviously satisfy Axor if true. Unfortunately, I do not understand equations and do not follow the maneuver by which Tipler reduces infinite time to finite.

The Thomist First Cause argument is completely inadequate. At the secondary school which I attended, a Jesuit presented us with these propositions:

every event is caused;
an infinite regress is impossible;
therefore, there was a first cause, which everyone calls God.

He added, "That then is the argument and the mind accepts that."

Even then, I knew that:

that is not the only, and certainly not the best, argument;
every mind does not accept it;
both premises need to be proved;
if every event is caused by an earlier event, then an infinite regress is not only possible but actual and there can have been no first cause which, in any case, would be a past event, not an eternal person;
there are allegedly uncaused events in quantum mechanics.

Maybe Tipler makes a better case for a First Cause which is also God (two conclusions to be proved) but I need the unmathematical layman's version.

(BTW, the family outing was to the Wolfhouse Gallery (scroll down), then to Wallings Ice Cream.)

1 comment:

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

Perhaps three paragraphs of a letter from Poul Anderson that I quoted in the combox of the blog piece "Between Posts" (January 21, 2016) might clarify for you what Tipler tried to say about how multiple universes can exist.

The first four chapters of THE PHYSICS OF CHRISTIANITY were the most difficult parts of that book for me, as apparently, they were for you. But I think I understood the pros commentary, despite making no claim to understanding the mercifully few equations Tipler had to sometimes use.

As a physicist himself, Anderson would have had no trouble grasping Tipler's argument. A pity he didn't live to read this book!

Sean