Sufficient physical causes

I become convinced that physical event A is sufficiently caused by B, and B by C ad infinitum since some conserved quantity in A was the same in B and C etc. I become a physicalist and/or determinist.

My account has an unresolved catch-22, since if physical causes without exception require physical antecedents the motion can never begin, just as if managerial jobs without exception require experience working as a manager then no one could ever be hired as one.

I want to remain a physicalist, so I note that it’s simply given that the motion exists, and it had to start somehow. But the observation belies my point, since the dispute has never been over whether there is motion but what a sufficient cause of it would have to look like.

It turns out that conservation laws give me infinite sufficient causes in the same way that electrical cords are of an indefinite length. Conserved quantities are homogeneous middle parts, and one can have as many such parts as he pleases. Considered precisely as multiplicable, one can have as many feet of cord or sufficient physical causes as he likes. Considered as middle, however, physical causes are conduits of higher order and thus non-interactive actions.

A cause is sufficient if I don’t need one of a different kind, and if you consider the causes as multiplicable – or anything as multiplicable in number – it certainly has such a feature. Conserved causes are infinite and sufficient like sandwich fillings are: nothing about this one requires the next one be something different in kind, and this sufficiency allows for the infinity of one being able to have as many fillers as he wants. Just not to the exclusion of bread.

%d bloggers like this: