The philosophical analysis of causality or causation has proved exceedingly difficult. The work of philosophers to understand causality and how best to characterize it extends over millennia. In the western philosophical tradition explicit discussion stretches back at least as far as Aristotle, and the topic remains a constant in contemporary philosophy journals.

Causation

The First Cause ArgumentThe first cause argument (or

“cosmological argument”) takes the existence of the universe to entail

the existence of a being that created it. It does so based on the

fact that the universe had a beginning. The first cause

argument says, there must, be something that caused that

beginning, a first cause of the universe.

The Cosmological Argument or First Cause Argument is a philosophical argument for the existence of God which explains that everything has a cause, and that there must have been a first cause, and that this first cause was itself uncaused.

'First cause arguments' were set forth by Plato and Aristotle in the 4th and 3rd

centuries BC. These arguments maintain that everything that exists or occurs must

have had a cause. So if one would go back in time far enough, one would discover a first cause. Aristotle said that this first cause was the creator of the universe. Thomas Aquinas,

a Christian, then expanded on Aristotle's ideas in the 13th century AD and molded the first cause-concept into a framework in which the cause of the universe itself is uncaused:

the First Cause is God.

The universe consists of a series of events stretched across time in a long causal chain. Each one of these

events is the cause of the event that comes after it, and the effect of the event that comes before it. The world

as it is came from the world as it was, which came from the world as it was before.

Q..If we trace this series of events back in time, then what do we find?

There seems, to be two possibilities: either we eventually reach the first event in the series, the cause

at the beginning of the universe that set everything going, or there is no first event in the series and the past

stretches back into infinity.

The first cause argument tells us that the second of these is not possible, that the past cannot

stretch back into infinity but rather must have a beginning. The argument then proceeds by

suggesting that if the universe has a beginning then there must be something outside it that

brought it into existence.

This being outside the universe, this Creator, is God

Cosmological Argument - What Does The Bible Say?

The Bible tells us, from the very first verse, that God created the universe. "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" (Genesis 1:1). "The LORD made the heavens" (1 Chronicles 16:26). We know that God is not Himself a physical part of the universe. 2 Chronicles 2:6 states: ". . .the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain him". We also know that "the LORD, the everlasting God" (Genesis 21:33) is eternal and infinite. "His mighty power rules forever" (Psalm 66:7). The Bible teaches very clearly that God is the uncaused First Cause who created the universe by willing it into existence.

Teleological argument

• The word "teleology" comes from "telos" which means "purpose" or "goal." The idea is that it takes a "purposer" to have purpose, and so where we see things obviously intended for a purpose something had to have caused it for a reason. In other words, design implies a designer. We instinctively do this all the time. The difference between the Grand Canyon and Mount Rushmore is obvious—one is designed, one is not. The Grand Canyon was clearly formed by non-rational, natural processes, whereas Mount Rushmore was clearly created by an intelligent being—a designer.

It has the clear marks of design—it has a purpose, it conveys information, it is specifically complex, etc. In no scientific field is design considered to be spontaneous; it always implies a designer, and the greater the design, the greater the designer. Thus, taking the assumptions of science, the universe would require a designer beyond itself (i.e. supernatural).

• The teleological argument applies this criteria to the whole universe. If designs imply a designer, and the universe shows marks of design, then the universe was created. Clearly every life form in earth's history has been highly complex. A single strand of DNA equates to one volume of the encyclopedia Britannica. The human brain is approximately 10 billion gigabytes in capacity. Besides living things here on earth, the whole universe seems designed for life. Literally hundreds of conditions are required for life on earth—everything from the mass density of the universe down to earthquake activity, must be fine tuned in order for life to survive. The random chance of all these things occurring is literally beyond imagination. With this much design it is difficult to believe that we just got lucky. In fact, top atheist philosopher Antony Flew's recent conversion to theism was based largely on this argument.

• In addition to being used to demonstrate God's existence, the teleological argument also exposes shortcomings in the theory of evolution. The Intelligent Design movement in science applies information theory to life systems and shows that chance cannot even begin to explain its complexity. In fact, even single-celled bacteria are so complex that without all of their parts working together at the same time they would have no survival potential. That means those parts could not have developed by chance. Darwin recognized that this might be a problem someday just by looking at the human eye. Little did he know that even single-celled creatures have too much complexity to explain without a creator!

Though the concept of causation has emerged in Pre-Socratic philosophy, it was probably Plato who first stated the principle of causality: "every thing that becomes or changes must do so owing to some cause; for nothing can come to be without a cause". But Plato emphasized the causal importance of formal causes. Nothing can be unless there be a changeless pattern of formal causes of which the individual sensible phenomenon is a mere appear ance. However, Aristotle was the first philosopher to give an extensive account of causes.

CAUSATION IN ANCIENT GREECE

•The series must start with something, since nothing can come from nothing.” Aristotle, Metaphysics, Beta 4 (999b)

AristotleOne of the most important aspects of Aristotle’s philosophy was the development of potentiality into actuality. For Aristotle, the development provided a basis from which to discuss the beginnings of all things, including existence itself.

Aristotle explained the movement from potential to actual in terms of the causes that act on all things. He suggested that there were Four Causes

The material cause is that "raw material" from which a thing is produced as from its parts, constituents, substratum, or materials. This rubric limits the explanation of cause to the parts (the factors, elements, constituents,

ingredients) forming the whole (the system, structure, compound, complex, composite, or

combination) (the part-whole causation).

Material cause

The formal cause tells us what, by analogy to the plans of an artisan, a thing is intended and planned to be. Any thing is thought to be determined by its definition, form (mold), pattern, essence, whole,

synthesis, or archetype. This analysis embraces the account of causes in terms of fundamental

principles or general laws, as the intended whole (macrostructure) is the cause that explains the

production of its parts (the whole-part causation).

Formal cause

The efficient cause is that external entity from which the change or the ending of the change first starts. It

identifies 'what makes of what is made and what causes change of what is changed' and so suggests all sorts of agents, nonliving or living, acting as the

sources of change or movement or rest. Representing the current understanding of causality

as the relation of cause and effect, this analysis covers the modern definitions of "cause" as either the agent, agency, particular causal events, or the

relevant causal states of affairs.

The efficient cause

The final cause

The final cause is that for the sake of which a thing exists, or is done - including both purposeful and instrumental actions. The final cause, or telos, is the purpose, or end, that something is supposed to serve; or it is that from which, and that to which, the change is. This analysis also covers modern ideas of mental causation involving such psychological causes as desire, need, motivation, or motives; rational, irrational, ethical - all that gives purpose to behavior.

Consider a house

• The material cause of the house is the bricks, the mortar the wood and the glass this causes the structure to exist.

• The efficient cause of the house is the process of building it: digging and laying foundations, completing the brickwork, and the roofing.

• The formal cause of the house is the architect’ plan and possibly the artists impression- it is the design from which the house is made.

• The final cause of the house is the desire to create a dwelling for people to live in

Consider a house

• Aristotle said. “all change is from what is potentially to what is actually, from being potentially white, say, to actually white. This is the reason why not only is there a coming to be from what is not accidentally, but every case of coming to be is also from what is. It is from what is potentially but not actually.”

Aristotle went on to categorise different substances, many of which are brought about or

changed by the four causes.

• Substances which are evident but will decay or die

• Substances which are evident but will not decay or die e.g. time

• Substances that are immune from any change e.g. the number 2

Aristotle believed there was a common source off all substance; in other words something or someone that was responsible for the beginning of everything.

Aristotle develops an argument to suggest that the common source is an eternal substance, which exists necessarily and is immune to change.

His argument is

• There must be something that is not subject to change, decay and death or the whole world would be subject to change, decay and death.

• The whole world is not subject to these things: time for example will not decay and die.

• However time can only be so if there is something in it that is not subject to change, decay and death.

• Therefore there must be an eternal substance which is not subject to change, decay and death….e.g. a first cause.

    CAUSATION IN THE MIDDLE AGES

In the thirteenth century, most Christian philosophers tried to reconcile Aristotle's philosophy with the Christian idea

that God created the world out of nothing. As a consequence, Aristotle's ‘unmoved mover’ was

transformed into a ‘creating cause of existence. Most thirteenth century philoso phers, contrary to Aristotle,

distinguished two quite different sorts of efficient cause: causa prima and causa secun da. The first type of efficient cause is the originative source of being. The second type of efficient cause is to be found only in created things, and refers to the origin of the beginning of motion or change.

The First Cause works in all secondary causes, which may be considered as instrumental causes passive to the first.

CAUSATION IN THE MIDDLE AGES

This conception of the primary efficient cause involves a radical switch in respect of the

Aristotelian notion of efficient causality. Whereas for Aristotle, efficient causation was the origin of a change or a motion by means of the transmission of form, in medieval philosophy, primary efficient

causality concerns the creation of both matter and form.

Aquinas developed five ways: “Demostratio” The first three were

used to argue God is the cause of the universe.

The First way: Motion/Change

•Since an object can only move when an external force is applied to it, there must be a first mover as the chain of movements and applied forces cannot lead back to infinity. Aristotle called this the “Prime mover” or “Unmoved mover”. “It is necessary to arrive at a first mover, moved by no other; and this, everybody understands to be God.”

Second Way: Cause

•Aquinas said that nothing can be the cause of itself, or it would have had to exist before it actually did, which is illogical. There is therefore a chain of causes, which must lead to the first cause, as the chain cannot go back to infinity. Leibniz added: “If you would suppose the world eternal, you will suppose nothing but a succession of empty states, and will not find in any of them a sufficient reason.” In other words, the reason/cause is external to the world, i.e. God.

Third Way: Contingency of matter in the universe.

•“We find in nature, things are possible to be, and not to be, since they are found to be generated and then corrupted.” Aquinas considered the possibility that time is infinite; if this is so, there must have been a time when nothing existed (as contingency states that nothing exists forever). If there was a time when nothing existed, nothing would exist now either, as nothing could have brought itself into existence. Therefore: “we cannot but admit the existence of some being having of itself its own necessity, and not receiving it from any other, but rather causing in other their necessity.” This necessary being must be external to the world; i.e. God.

What do these mean?

• There is an efficient cause and prime mover, who is actuality -not potentiality.

• The being’s existence is necessary.

• It is believed the being to be God.

Russell and Copleston’s debate

• In 1947, Copleston (1907-94), who agreed with the cosmological argument, and Russell, who didn’t, argued their two opposing views about the origin of the universe in a debate on bbc radio.

• The debate focused on the principle of sufficient reason. Coplestion believed the universe can only be sufficiently explained by reference to God; believing God to be his own sufficient cause.

• Russell believed whether there is an explanation for the universe or not, it is beyond the reach of human beings.

• Russell also asks why it is necessary to have a sufficient explanation for the universe that goes beyond the contingent universe?

CAUSATION IN MODERN PHILOSOPHY

. In the seventeenth century a movement of thought arose that has come to be known as modern science. This evolution involved a radical change in the development of the concept of cause. Explanations by formal causation and final causation were rejected; the only valid explanations were explanations by efficient causation. Moreover, the concept of efficient causation itself had radically changed.

Christian and Judaic views on the cause

• Christians believe that God created the world and all living things. They picture God as having three forms or aspects: God the Father, God the Son (Jesus) and God the Hoy Spirit, who carries out God's will on earth. They believe that God sent Jesus to tell people about God's love, and that Jesus died to forgive humanity's sins. They also believe that Jesus will return at the end of time, when there will be a New Creation. The following creation story is found in Genesis 1 and 2 in the Old Testament section of the Bible, the Christian holy book.

• In the beginning, God created the universe. At first the earth was shapeless and covered in darkness, and God's spirit hovered over the waters. God said, "Let there be light". And there was light. God divided the day from the night, naming them ' day' and 'night'. This was the first day and God saw that it was good. On the second day God made the heavens to separate the water from the earth and on the third day he raised the dry land up from the waters below the heavens and commanded the earth to bring forth all plants. God saw that it was good. God then made the greater light for the day and the lesser light for the night, and he saw hat it was good. This was the fourth day. On the fifth day God commanded the waters to fill with living creatures and the air to fill with birds. And he was pleased with what he saw.

• On the sixth day God commanded the earth to bring forth all kinds of living creatures and he saw that it was good. God then said " Let us make man in our own image". So God created man and woman in his own likeness and gave them authority over all living things. God looked at everything he had made and was very pleased. On the seventh day, God rested.Now the first man, Adam, was created by God out of soil and given life by God's breath. Adam named all the animals and birds that God had made, But Adam had no companion of his own so God caused hem to fall into a deep sleep and created woman - Eve- from one of Adam's ribs. God told them that together they could live in the Garden of Eden eating whatever they wished except the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. But the most cunning animal, which God had made -the serpent -, tempted Eve to eat the forbidden fruit. So Adam and Eve both ate and suddenly saw what they had done ant that they were naked. Covering themselves with fig leaves they tried to hide from God. But God knew of their sin and called out to them. Then he cursed the serpent and Adam and Eve, and in shame they were driven from the beautiful Garden. God told Adam he would now have to toil and sweat to work the very soil from which he had been created. Then God blocked the entrance to the Garden with a great fiery sword so that no one could enter in.

• For Christians the most important part of this story is the final creation of human beings. Since they were made in God's image and given power over all living things, Christian believe that humans are the most important of God's creations. Some Christians think that this means humans can use the world as they wish, while other believe that God intended humans to care for an look after the work. Christians use the story of 'the fall' to explain why suffering and death have entered the world. But they believe that God will create a new and better world where those who have tried to live as God wants, will live for ever.

The Buddhist way of thinking encourages people to live a life based around karma, samsara and the twelve links of causality. This diagram which is one of the earliest historical examples of a visual aid used in Buddhist teaching shows a classic example of what Buddhists believe takes place in the constantly changing world. It is crucial to understand the Tibetan wheel of life in order to grasp any Buddhism concepts as they all link together.

• The Tibetan wheel of life can be separated into five segments which consist of:

Devas or gods. 

Ashuras or titans (anti-gods, jealous gods, demigods, aka "demons") 

Manushyas or humans. 

Tiryakas or animals. 

Pretas or hungry ghosts. 

• The Tibetan wheel of life is driven by its hub of the Three Poisons: desire or attachment, aversion or hatred, and delusion or ignorance, and by the energy resulting from our actions that are always motivated by all three. 

• The realms relate to six distinct conditions. In the two higher realms, they are Pride and Jealousy.  In the realm of humans they are afflicted with five disturbing emotions.  The lower realms are associated with Ignorance, Desire and Anger. At the top of it all are the heavens or realm of gods that is usually blended with that of the demi-  or anti-gods, titans or ashuras, with whom they constantly struggle for dominance.

• Ones journey in the Tibetan wheel of life starts with the beginning of consciousness in the womb, carrying on all through your life and ending with your death, and then all over again if necessary- including the stages of the foetus process in the womb of a mother.    

The Tibetan wheel of life

The very top realm is heaven and this is the ultimate goal for all Buddhists as it is here where many choose to rest (apart from Bodhisattvas). At the complete opposite side of the wheel is the realm of hell which is often shown as a place that involves both hot and cold torment, in fact there are many stories about what it consists of but the main fact is that it all is a product of our own mind.

After the realm of hell comes the animal realm where anything from wales to insects are confined in a world of fear and ignorance. After this comes the human realm which is varied in its conditions, degrees and statuses. It is in the human realm that Buddhists believe it is easier to achieve enlightenment, as our experiences give us the best opportunities.

Not only are there these five main realms but there are also the in between states which are called the bardo, which would be described as a form of non-embodied consciousness- as in a form of dreaming.

At first glance the Tibetan wheel may seem rather dismal but if you look closely there is a picture of the dharma in every realm, providing an opportunity for liberation from samsara.

The Tibetan wheel of life is only one example of a wheel of rebirth as there are various examples, but they all symbolise the same thing.

The 12 links of causality

On the outer rim of the Tibetan wheel of life there are 12 image which all act as visual aids in helping to show what factors determine the consequences of ones actions-karma. They too can vary in what they look like as it usually depends on what artist drew them.

The first image is of a blind man with a stick representing spiritual blindness; this is the state of ignorance in which we can easily lose our way.  Sometimes we do not even know there is a way, and therefore we get trapped in an ongoing cycle of karma and rebirth.   The second image is of a potter at work on his own creations.  These are the deeds and actions we perform, as we are all responsible for our own pots, not fate.

The third image is of a monkey playing in a tree.  It shows how ordinary attention or consciousness can so easily shift into the undisciplined mind, and therefore prolong the cycle of rebirth and karma.  Meditation tries to calm and train the monkey in order that it can focus and reach the goal of enlightenment quicker.

The fourth image is a boat containing two people, they act together as the conditioned way in which we experience the world.  The boat is the mind moving about on 'reality‘, but some have also interpreted this image as the physical and the intellectual moving the boat of experience. 

The fifth image is a house with six openings:  five shuttered windows and a closed door.  These are the five senses plus a sixth which enables one to interpret the senses at a sub-conscious level.

• The sixth image is a man and a woman embracing which is an example of sensual awareness..

• The seventh image is a person who has been struck in the eye by an arrow.  He is

wounded by emotion which is the root cause of his intense suffering. • The eighth image is a woman offering a drink to a man.  It demonstrates how desire is

stimulated by perceptions and emotions which then leads us to ‘drink’ or take more from the world of appearances.

• The ninth image is a person picking fruit of his tree. He expects to get something sweet from all his efforts.

• The tenth image is a maiden about to cross a river. The next part of the image varies but

it is usually someone on the other side beckoning and tempting her to come over. • The eleventh image is a woman giving birth. The new babies life is determined by the

fruits laid down by the old and is attracted to the parents according to their lives so far. • The twelfth image is that of two people carrying a burden, consisting of a corpse

wrapped up in cloth ready to be disposed of . The image is trying to show that people suffer when they try to bear the burden of another person’s death. 

Samsara• Buddhists believe that the unsatisfactory and ongoing cycle of death and rebirth

continues until enlightenment is achieved, as then samsara is brought to an end.

• Samsara affects everyone in every circumstance as however happy you believe yourself to be, it is only misery in disguise. This is because even if you have money, a healthy body, friends and a happy family it can never last because the misery of impermanence will soon arise. Even if your life seems happy and you are a good person, you will never be able to escape the consequences of samsara.

• In order to overcome the problems of our unchanging self it is useful to study the Five Skandhas which analyse selfhood.

• The five Skandhas are: Rupa (form or matter)

Vedana (sensation)Samjna (perception)

Samskara (karmic conditioning)Vijnana (when an organ comes into contact with its object)

Overall conclusion

• Whether we are meditating, dreaming, or going about our general lives ultimately we are responsible for our own experience. According to Buddhist teachings, objects and beings come into existence without any First Cause creating them. 

• An example many Buddhists use to visualise the life in samsara is of a painter who can paint a portrait of a demon and then be terrified by it. Unenlightened beings do something similar in that they can also paint a picture of the six realms of samsara and then be tormented and terrified by this metal picture.

• Through the power of our own minds, we create the six realms of existence and then rotate through them depending on our karmic results. We are the ones who create the realms and the endless cycle we know as samsara.