From: 69jpil69@gmail.com   
      
   On Wed, 18 Feb 2026 11:23:15 +1100, MarkE  wrote:   
      
   >On 18/02/2026 1:14 am, John Harshman wrote:   
   >> On 2/17/26 4:39 AM, Ernest Major wrote:   
   >>> On 17/02/2026 04:08, John Harshman wrote:   
   >>>> "aseity"?   
   >>>   
   >>> https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/aseity   
   >>>   
   >> Ah, the get out of infinite regress free card. The bottom turtle.   
   >>    
   >   
   >Are you suggesting that any hypothesis that terminates the causal chain    
   >is invalid in principle? The alternative of an infinite regress is    
   >effectively no explanation.   
   >   
   >This is a common category error. Causal explanations are restricted to    
   >the domain of methodological naturalism, i.e. they describe mechanisms    
   >within the universe. A First Cause explains why the universe exists    
   >(e.g. why there something rather than nothing, and why physical laws exist).   
      
      
   Incorrect.  A First Cause explains nothing when that First Cause is   
   asserted by fiat.     
      
   --    
   To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)