The Fallacy of Composition - Is That Really Enough?

i see roe's discussion is a kind of further development. He develops copplestone's line without going through a fallacy of composition, but instead by appealing to a certain principle of explanation. And so this principle of explanation that contingent things, dependent things, whether one or many have a further explanation, that's like the key to unlock this argument. i think that's kind of the right point to make there. You know, a how do you know there's always a cause? There's always an explanation.