Which distinction does Hicks draw on to defend Aquinas' first-cause argument?

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

Hicks argues that Aquinas' first-cause argument is not simply a regress of events, but rather a regress of explanations. He distinguishes this from a regress of events where each event is caused by a prior event, which would lead to an infinite regress. However, in a regress of explanations, the series of causes and effects ultimately leads back to a first cause which does not require further explanation. Therefore, Hicks argues that Aquinas' argument is sound because it avoids an infinite regress of explanations.

Which Distinction Does Hicks Draw on to Defend Aquinas' First-Cause