Uploaded May 2012 | Updated September 2026, 4 days ago
William Lane Craig (theist) and Ronald De Sousa (atheist) debate the first premise of the Kalam Cosmological Argument that whatever begins to exist has a cause. Oddly, De Sousa thinks the causal principle (which the first premise of the KCA is based on) is wrong. Worse, he thinks that the quantum vacuum fluctuation model proves that somehing can pop into existence uncaused out of nothing! Many naive skeptics follow this line of reasoning and pseudo-science when it comes to refuting the first premise of the KCA.
William Lane Craig (theist) and Ronald De Sousa (atheist) debate the first premise of the Kalam Cosmological Argument that whatever begins to exist has a cause. Oddly, De Sousa thinks the causal principle (which the first premise of the KCA is based on) is wrong. Worse, he thinks that the quantum vacuum fluctuation model proves that somehing can pop into existence uncaused out of nothing! Many naive skeptics follow this line of reasoning and pseudo-science when it comes to refuting the first premise of the KCA.
