论文标题
卡拉姆宇宙论的论点遇到了Mentaculus
The Kalam Cosmological Argument Meets The Mentaculus
论文作者
论文摘要
根据对弹跳宇宙学的东正教解释，宇宙是从先前宇宙中的熵减少阶段出生的。为了捍卫这一论点，即在有限的时间之前，整个物理现实是存在的，威廉·莱恩·克雷格（William Lane Craig）和合着者詹姆斯·辛克莱（James Sinclair）认为，宇宙之间的低熵界面应被理解为两个宇宙的开始。在这里，我呈现了克雷格和辛克莱的困境。一方面，如果时间的方向是可以降低的，因为Mentaculus的朋友（例如David Albert，Barry Loewer和David Papineau）保持了，那么有理由认为时间的方向和时间的熵箭头。但是，基于这个，有效的因果关系可能还可以降低为非因果现象。因此，与克雷格（Craig）和辛克莱（Sinclair）的神学目标相反，事物可以开始存在而没有原因。另一方面，如果时间方向无法降低，则克雷格（Craig）和辛克莱（Sinclair）对弹跳宇宙学的解释是不合理的。最后，对潜在异议的答复激发了关于如何解释Craig和Sinclair偏爱的绝对时间理论的弹跳宇宙学的讨论。我提供了两种对弹跳宇宙学的解释，鉴于绝对时间的紧张理论比那些克雷格（Craig）和辛克莱（Sinclair）的提议更可取，但与他们在自然神学领域的项目不一致。在一种解释中，宇宙不需要超自然的原因，另一方面，弹跳宇宙学代表了宇宙从未开始存在的宇宙。
According to the orthodox interpretation of bounce cosmologies, the universe was born from an entropy reducing phase in a previous universe. To defend the thesis that the whole of physical reality was caused to exist a finite time ago, William Lane Craig and co-author James Sinclair have argued the low entropy interface between universes should instead be understood as the beginning of two universes. Here, I present Craig and Sinclair with a dilemma. On the one hand, if the direction of time is reducible, as friends of the Mentaculus -- e.g., David Albert, Barry Loewer, and David Papineau -- maintain, then there is reason to think that the direction of time and the entropic arrow of time align. But on that account, efficient causation is likely reducible to non-causal phenomena. In consequence, contrary to Craig and Sinclair's theological aims, things can begin to exist without causes. On the other hand, if the direction of time is not reducible, Craig and Sinclair's interpretation of bounce cosmologies is unjustified. Lastly, a reply to a potential objection motivates a discussion of how to interpret bounce cosmologies on the tensed theory of absolute time favored by Craig and Sinclair. I offer two interpretations of bounce cosmologies that, given a tensed theory of absolute time, are preferable to those Craig and Sinclair offer, yet inconsistent with their project in natural theology; on one interpretation, the universe does not require a supernatural cause and, on the other, bounce cosmologies represent the universe as never having begun to exist.
