Hmm… that doesn’t make sense. Maybe it’s your use of the term “automated” that’s causing me problems: if something is ‘automated’, then (by definition) it’s automated by something. Therefore, that ‘something’ would be the First Cause, not the automation that it created.
However, I think you’re trying to suggest not that there’s something ‘automated’, per se, but rather, “acting without agency or intention.” Interestingly, the best way that you can find to explain it is as something ‘automated’… which, of course, makes your question a non-starter from the beginning. :shrug:
No, the suggestion is that the First Cause IS an automated process which creates without preference. Creation based on preference would suggest choice-making ability. But a First Cause creating without preference would create every possible combination of physical laws, both the possible and the impossible.
Hmm… ok, then: maybe the word you’re trying to find, then, is automaton?
I mean the one inherently existing thing, that at time=0 existed all by itself, but contained within it the power to create everything which came after it.
Well, I think that there are still some problematic aspects of your construction: after all, time itself is a creation; so, the First Cause must – necessarily! – exist outside of creation, both in terms of time and space!
But, let’s say that your definition is simply that the First Cause exists prior to any created thing. Is that the extent of the definition, then?