 This yields an infinite regress, at least from the assumption that there is at least one event. If there is an event, \(E_1\), then it is preceded by its cause. That cause cannot be \(E_1\), as nothing precedes itself and causes precede what they cause. So the cause of \(E_1\) must be a new event, \(E_2\). This event is preceded by its cause. This cannot be \(E_2\) for the same reasons as before, and it cannot be \(E_1\) because then each of \(E_1\) and \(E_2\) would precede the other in violation of asymmetry. So the cause of \(E_2\) must be a new event, \(E_3\). \(E_3\) is preceded by its cause. It cannot be \(E_3\) or \(E_2\) for reasons similar to before. And it cannot be \(E_1\), for then \(E_1\) would precede \(E_3\), but since \(E_3\) precedes \(E_2\) which precedes \(E_1\), transitivity entails that \(E_3\) precedes \(E_1\), and so \(E_1\) cannot precede \(E_3\) due to asymmetry. So the cause of \(E_3\) must be a new event, \(E_4\). And so on …