Barry,
1. > Can you give us a specific example that presents your > > case and does not follow the statement under the first > > premise? > > I'm out in the Anza-Borrego desert, at night, > in a certain canyon I know of. Sometimes, when > I go there, there is a certain rock face in the > side of a mountain that is just a rock face in > the side of a mountain. But at other times it > transforms into a portal through which one can > glimpse other worlds, and beings of light who > live in those other worlds. > > I've caught glimpses of these other worlds in > this place maybe half a dozen times over the > years. Haven't got a clue what it means, or > if it means anything. What I find more inter- > esting is that sometimes it was a rock face > and sometimes it was a portal. Nothing I can > think of acted as a "cause" to create one per- > ception or the other. It either happened or > it didn't, on its own schedule, not mine. > > So what's the "cause" of such a phenomenon or > perception? More important, were the portals > always there, and I only noticed them from > time to time, or did they come into being > (begin to exist) only when I noticed them? It doesn't appear that this example is a refutation of the first premise: "Whatever begins to exist has a cause." IMO, what you saw never existed in the first place. You imagined that a portal appeared to you. But it actually is just a product of your overactive imagination. Or, it could be that you were hallucinting? What was the cause of your hallucination? For all we know, you could have been high of some drug, mushroom or marijuana. As such, your argument against the first premise does not hold. You should reconsider your position before continuing with the rest of the KCA. JR > :-) >
