he made a fundamental error in his definition of causality. He assumed that the law of causality is simply, “Everything must have a cause.” If indeed the law could be defined in this way, then Mill’s criticism would be just. But such is not the case. The law of causality does not require that everything have a cause, only that every effect must have a cause. An eternal object need not have a cause—Aristotle got that right. If Mill would have gotten it right, perhaps Russell would not have been led