The existence of the universe. Most naturalists will reject the PSR and if the universe did have a beginning then it’s explained by its own existence. It’s just a brute fact. If you’re a moral realist, objective moral values are brute facts. That model of ethics is also consistent with Theism though. I hold to it. As does Swinburne
1 Like
I don’t think that the universe explains itself.
I’m not.
Please look at the updated version of the argument again. Premise 5 shows that without E being self-explanatory, we result in an infinite regress. Per your objection before, I had re-updated premise 5 (see post #30) to
If E is explained by something else (call it E2), then (from 1, 2) E2 must be either be explained by something else or itself, which in the former case would imply that it has to be explained by something else (call it E3), ad infinitum.
Then on atheism, what explains the universe’s existence?
1 Like
I see where you’re trying to go with that revise premise 5; it just isn’t there yet. The explanatory chain only goes ad infinitum if the chain doesn’t end ad some E-sub-n, where n is finite. You want to make E into shorthand for E-sub-n, that is the explanation (of the explanation)^n for the universe.
Dunno.
1 Like
And I think that’s an okay answer.
well it not for the commissions that I don’t get on all sales. 
Here is a new one from Dan Barker.
Not the Bible.
Is this sufficient to explain something?