TED Conversations

Sunny Qureshi

CEO, IQ Training & Consultancy

This conversation is closed.

Can we prove Aristotle’s “Prime Mover”:Everything that happens is caused by something else?Then what caused the first cause?


The cause of the universe might be eternal, thus eliminating the need for a cause. As people have accepted the Big Bang Theory, so this objection has fallen out of favor.

It is worth pointing out that time is an aspect of the universe,without the universe, there is no time. It has existed at every point in time and that at no point in time has there been no universe.

1.Everything that exists or begins to exist has a cause?
2. Universe began to exist therefore it has a cause "the first cause" or was the matter already present that caused it?
4. If it was the first cause then what caused the first cause?


Closing Statement from Sunny Qureshi

The Debate was a mixture of philosophical and scientific arguments presented by members.

The question still remains unanswered as both schools of thought were inconclusive on the God or no God debate.

The problem is of the fact that both atheists and theists are both opposed to each others "belief". Even in science, hypothesisation which is a kind of belief that has not been proved exists.

This debate and other debates will remain inconclusive unless and until a Collaborative stance is not adopted by the two.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Comment deleted

    • Mar 18 2012: To state that the entire universe, its creation and development, is to be envisioned in a spiritual way (i.e., to eliminate the consequences of science, and to discredit logic) would be opening a field in which anything can be believed. According to your rationale, that things intangible exist beyond our realm of understanding- therefore leading to our own existence- you should be an Agnostic who is unsure, seeing as anything is possible. Just because science cannot pinpoint the exact way the world was created does not warrant you to assume that there was a higher being who did it. There is no reason to believe in something unless proven to a degree- divinity being unproven, one shouldn't even consider its part in our existence. Also, I hate to be "that guy who trusts empirical evidence as opposed to abstract mysticism", but the concept that there exists a direct correlation between our mind wanting to perform an act (such as the "slightest move of a finger") and our body performing that act is an integral part, if not the essential component, to biological neuropsychology. We do not make this connection through spirituality or love- rather, we possess neurotransmitters that which transport the chemical information throughout our bodies. I take it that you're a very privileged person because you believe that god is love. If you've ever taken a closer look at this planet that we live on it's pretty evident that the only 'love' that exists is man-made. The amount of hell that most of the people on this planet go through is a pretty strong indication that there is no god, let alone a loving, benevolent, omnipotent one. And if there is one, I'm sure that he'd pardon me for calling him a first class selfish, ego-maniacal jerk. I appreciate your zealousness towards spreading love across the world, but please don't lie about its origin.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.