A FUNDAMENTAL LAW OF NATURE

The Rule Against Infinite Regression: A Limit of Reason and Reality

One of the fundamental rules governing our understanding of the universe is that there can be no infinite regression of causation. This principle is often debated between physics and philosophy. Still, regardless of how we label it, the necessity of a stopping point in causation is an inescapable reality.

The Problem of First Causes

The human mind naturally seeks explanations. When confronted with a mystery, we instinctively ask, "What caused this?" This question applies to everything from the universe's origins to the emergence of life itself. However, when assigning a cause to an event, the question must be asked: "What caused that cause?" This leads to infinite regression unless a logical boundary is drawn.

This is where the concept of an uncaused cause, or a necessary existence, becomes crucial. If every event required a prior cause, and this chain continued indefinitely, then nothing could ever exist because existence would be contingent on an unending series of prior conditions that could never be fully met. In short, if everything required a cause, nothing could have ever begun.

Theological and Scientific Dilemmas

One of the classic illustrations of this problem is the theological assertion that God is the first cause of everything. But this explanation merely shifts the question: What caused God? If the answer is that God has always existed and needs no cause, then why not apply the same principle directly to the universe itself? Why introduce an additional entity when the more straightforward explanation is that existence is fundamental and uncaused?

Physics and cosmology do not yet provide an entirely conclusive answer to the universe's origins. The prevailing theory, the Big Bang, describes the universe's expansion from a highly dense singularity. Still, it does not yet explain why that singularity existed in the first place. Some theoretical models propose that the universe may be part of a cyclical process of expansion and contraction, while others suggest quantum fluctuations outside of classical causation. But in each case, the notion that the universe must have been "caused" in a traditional sense is increasingly challenged by modern physics.

Similarly, the origins of life are an open scientific question. We understand how life developed and diversified through evolution thanks to Charles Darwin, but the precise mechanism that led from non-life to life remains uncertain. Some propose abiogenesis, a natural, chemical process that led to the formation of self-replicating molecules, but even here, the question of "what caused that?" continues. If we insist on tracing causation back infinitely, we will never find an answer because an infinite chain of causes cannot exist.

The Necessity of Accepting an Uncaused Reality

At some point, we must acknowledge that something exists because it does. The universe exists because it exists. Life became life because it did. This is not an abdication of reason but an acknowledgment of a fundamental truth: infinite regression is logically impossible.

Philosophers from Aristotle to Immanuel Kant have wrestled with this issue. Aristotle proposed the idea of a "Prime Mover", an uncaused first cause that sets everything else into motion. Kant argued that human reason, while powerful, is constrained and incapable of fully grasping certain ultimate realities. In both cases, the conclusion aligns with what logic suggests today: a fundamental reality must exist without an external cause.

The Limits of Human Inquiry

Some may find it unsettling that specific fundamental questions, such as the origins of existence itself, may never be fully answered. However, rather than seeing this as a limitation, we should embrace it as a framework that refines our inquiries. By accepting that not every question has an infinite chain of answers, we allow science and philosophy to focus on our reality's meaningful, solvable aspects rather than chasing an impossible regression.

The rule against infinite regression is a constraint and a necessary guide to rational thought. It helps us recognize some things. The universe is one such thing, and life is another. The search for knowledge must continue, but it must do so with the awareness that some answers are final, not because they are unsatisfactory but because they are fundamental.

William James Spriggs