This is the sixth part in a series proving agency and disproving the arguments against.
But some will say, “perhaps time and movement are circular.
It could be that movement has always been circular, without a beginning.” This
is false for the following reasons:
First, the circular proposition, by definition, says that of
all the things in the circle, none of them can be first movers. Rather, every
thing in the circle is moved by another. Thus nothing in the circle is causing
movement, but is being moved by another. Think of a large circle of boxcars linked
in a big circle. If they are moving, then all boxcars are being moved by
another, but none is causing movement, for no object in the circle is capable
of causing movement.
Therefore in the circular model, movement is uncaused, having
always existed. But denying that something can exist without a cause is a
primary premise of the argument against agency, which is why the circular model
is proposed. Thus the circular model is indeed circular, but illogically circular,
and in fact is no explanation at all.
In reality, movement cannot exist without a cause, and the
circular model proposed that nothing was causing the movement…rather, it
merely defines movement into existence at the beginning. If movement can be
defined into existence in the argument against agency, it can also be defined
in the argument for agency. In either case, the argument against agency fails
when the circular model is used.
Further, in the circular model, movement is proposed with no
cause, which is what it is trying to disprove. Thus the circular model is
Second, we have established that actual infinites cannot
exist, yet the circular model proposes that movement has existed for an
infinite amount of time. Therefore the circular model is false.
Third, we can reach the end of neither an infinite nor a circle,
yet we have reached the end of all moments (and movements) prior to now.
Fourth, the circular model is proposed as a simple assertion
without proof. The burden of proof for this model falls on the proponent.
Fifth, the circular model could only exist if something
outside of the circle were to maintain the movement. If there is a source of
movement outside the circle, the model is refuted, for it claims that
everything is within the circle.
Sixth, in the circular model, all objects in the circle are
composed beings, consisting of act and potency, for they are all being moved.
And since all composed beings must be actualized by something already in act,
the entire circle could only have been actualized by an external being, one of
pure act. With the existence of anything outside the circle, including pure
act, the circular model is refuted.
Seventh, all human perception is overwhelmingly supportive of a linear view of history, not a circular one. This is so great as to be a disproof a fortiori. Socrates has not lived again, last year’s football game is not played over, and each day brings a different combination of events.
The cumulative argument against the circular model is overwhelming.