...The cosmological argument The word “cosmos” means universe. The cosmological argument argues the existence of a first cause, God, from a posteriori and priori premise. It argues that the universe is contingent and therefore requires a cause, as nothing is the cause of itself. This is known as redicto- ad- absurdum. The argument is backed up by the five ways put forward by the 12th century theologian and philosopher, St Thomas Aquinas. In the 12th century, St Thomas Aquinas put forward 5 ways to prove the existence of God in his book “Summa Theologica”. Aquinas’s five ways to prove the existence of God are based on the work of Greek philosophers, Plato and Aristotle, whose work was later translated in Arabic, by Muslim philosophers Al- Kindi and Al- Ghazali, and then translated into Latin. I will be examining three of Aquinas’ ways, uncaused cause, unmoved mover and necessary being. As well as examining these three ways to prove the existence of God, I will be looking at their supporters and critics. Aquinas’ 1st way to prove the existence of God was the uncaused cause also known as the first cause. Aquinas considers the world in terms of “cause and effect” which means that without a cause there is no effect. Everything in the universe has a cause. Human beings have a cause (their parents) too. Aquinas argued that we could follow the chain of “cause and effect” all the way back, but there cannot be an infinite chain. There must be an uncaused cause, which causes everything...
Words: 1140 - Pages: 5
...McCLOSKEY PHIL 201-D10 FALL 2011 DR. EDWARD MARTIN BY IVAN DERRICK COOKE Cooke 2 INTRODUCTION In 1968, atheist philosopher H.J. McCloskey composed a strong argument on how being an atheist was far superior to the theistic lifestyle. This imperious article was published in the journal Question and reflects McCloskey’s view that “atheism is a much more comfortable belief than theism, and why theists should be miserable just because they are theists.”1 In his article, McCloskey seeks to disprove many of the arguments that theists believe and often seemingly ridicules or persecutes those who believe in God. Among the arguments McCloskey attempts to minimalize, there are three common proofs that many, if not all, theists lean on for their belief in God. These proofs include the cosmological proof, the teleological proof, and the argument from design. Furthermore, McCloskey speaks on the problem of evil and how the existence of evil disproves the reality of a God. Near the end of McCloskey’s article, he also insists that atheism is comforting, claiming that it is more comforting than theism. This paper will debate the validity and truth of the three claims that McCloskey seeks to discount in his article and will further debate the problem of evil and disprove the idea that atheism is comforting. PROOFS VS. ARGUMENTS ------------------------------------------------- McCloskey often slights the theistic view as one of vagueness and ignorance. He states, when referring to...
Words: 2514 - Pages: 11
...Philosophy 201 Fall 2013 H.J. McCloskey (1968) in his article on being an Atheist aimed to prove atheism a more viable belief than the Christian worldview. McCloskey disputed the three theistic proofs: the cosmological argument, the teleological argument and the argument from design. McCloskey called attention to the presence of evil in a world made by God. He went further saying that it was nonsensical to live by faith. McCloskey contended that proofs were not the reason that people have faith in God but rather people come to rely on religion because of other circumstances in life. In spite of this, the three arguments, show great validity in supporting the God of Christianity’s existence. Examining this from the cumulative case point, there is no for sure argument that supports the existence of God of Christianity but, placing all viewpoints together cumulatively, the case is quite formidable. The Cosmological argument contends that the creator of the universe, the cosmos, is God and God alone. The Teleological Argument expresses an intelligent creator and the argument of morality display how God is an interpersonal, morally flawless God. This supporting information gives some clarity of how the universe was created. According to McCloskey the Cosmological argument has many flaws because it is only based upon the world as we know it. From McCloskey’s perspective, just because the universe exists, doesn’t necessarily mean that there is a greater being responsible for it...
Words: 1458 - Pages: 6
...H.J. McCloskey (1968) in his article on being an Atheist aimed to prove atheism a more viable belief than the Christian worldview. McCloskey disputed the three theistic proofs: the cosmological argument, the teleological argument and the argument from design. McCloskey called attention to the presence of evil in a world made by God. He went further saying that it was nonsensical to live by faith. McCloskey contended that proofs were not the reason that people have faith in God but rather people come to rely on religion because of other circumstances in life. In spite of this, the three arguments, show great validity in supporting the God of Christianity’s existence. Examining this from the cumulative case point, there is no for sure argument that supports the existence of God of Christianity but, placing all viewpoints together cumulatively, the case is quite formidable. The Cosmological argument contends that the creator of the universe, the cosmos, is God and God alone. The Teleological Argument expresses an intelligent creator and the argument of morality display how God is an interpersonal, morally flawless God. This supporting information gives some clarity of how the universe was created. According to McCloskey the Cosmological argument has many flaws because it is only based upon the world as we know it. From McCloskey’s perspective, just because the universe exists, doesn’t necessarily mean that there is a greater being responsible for it. Nor does he think that that...
Words: 1448 - Pages: 6
...b) To what extent was Hume successful in his critique of the cosmological argument? [10]Hume makes some very important challenges to the Cosmological argument which some believe count decisively against it. One of the key areas he calls into question is the argument’s dependence upon what Leibniz termed the principle of sufficient reason. In this principle an adequate explanation must be a total explanation. The universe requires an explanation of itself as a whole. But many would say, as Russell later told Copleston: “Then I can only say that you’re looking for something which can’t be got, and which one ought not to expect to get.” If you have explained each individual element of a series any explanation of the series as a whole would seem to be superfluous, and besides he says that ‘the whole’ doesn’t really exist anyway – it is ‘an arbitrary act of mind’ that makes things into wholes. What we term the ‘whole universe’ in modern physics may be only a bubble in a larger reality that we have no way of grasping. Also if we are only entitled to talk about causes when we have had experience of them, then this argument would seem to be over-stretching itself in speculating upon what it cannot know. On the other hand, there is of course a problem with stopping at a certain point and saying that we should seek no further explanation, in that it is a basic presupposition of all scientific work. However, even though a principle of rationality is that we can find an explanation for...
Words: 2857 - Pages: 12
...to be seriously considered. In this paper I will argue for the sake that God does exist and the reasons why. I will include many of the arguments found in our philosophy book and those covered in class as well as other subjects such as human suffering and the reasons God chose to make the world as it is today, also including examples from life and the movies we watched in class. St. Thomas Aquinas had many arguments for the existence of God and one of those was the fifth way. In the argument of the fifth way Aquinas says “The fifth way is taken from the governance of the world. We see that things which lack knowledge, such as natural bodies, act for an end, and this is evident from their acting always, or nearly always, in the same way, so as to obtain the best result. Hence it is plain that they achieve their end, not fortuitously, but designedly. Now whatever lacks knowledge cannot move towards an end, unless it be directed by some being endowed with knowledge and intelligence; as the arrow is directed by the archer. Therefore, some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end; and this being we call God”. Here St. Thomas Aquinas is basically saying that the existence of order and apparent purpose in the universe is best explained by saying that an intellectual being caused it. A good example of this argument is if we were to look at the planets in our solar system. The planets being inanimate objects couldn’t have possible placed themselves...
Words: 1494 - Pages: 6
...is undoubtedly an intelligent and thoughtful man. His article was written in an easy to understand syntax, and was surely embraced by many that hold a similar position. In fact, I think that any Christian would find it easy to wholeheartedly agree with Mr. McCloskey. Atheism is a much better alternative than serving the kind of god he describes in his paper! While McCloskey's arguments sound good, his portrayal of a vengeful, vindictive and manipulating god seems foreign to a discerning Christian. Upon reading his article, one questions the depth of the author's research on the God of the Bible at all. It seems almost as if his only understanding of Him comes from the obviously uninformed theists he quotes in his article. One gets the impression that all theists are either dim-witted or gluttons for punishment, maybe even a little of both! McCloskey attempts to refute three well-known arguments for God’s existence. McCloskey’s arguments in most cases focus in the problem of evil. In his attempt to refute the cosmological argument, McCloskey makes the claim that when a theist uses this argument, he has not “thought far enough nor hard enough about the problem of an uncaused cause." It is upon making this statement that McCloskey’s bias takes center stage. The author expects the theist to explain what he himself cannot explain about his own position. McCloskey’s initial...
Words: 1827 - Pages: 8
...believes that the existence of evil discredits arguments made in support of believing in God. There is not one single thing in this world that we can know definitively without looking at the evidence. You have to look at the whole picture. Just like in a criminal investigation, the crime scene investigators gather evidence they are not looking for just the bullets or just the body. They look and gather all the data before coming to any conclusions. We will discuss each of the arguments and some additional reasons McCloskey gives as reasons not to believe that God exists. Cosmological Argument When we examine the cosmological argument we find that for something to exist there has to be a cause for its existence. The universe exists and was necessary for human beings to exist. We are contingent beings; our existence relies on the existence of the universe. We exist, and therefore so does the universe exist and there must be an ultimate cause of that existence. McCloskey makes a good point when he says the cosmological argument does not prove there is an all powerful, perfect uncaused cause but it provides strong evidence that there is some necessary cause to the world we live in and instead of being dismissed it should move us to investigate that “necessary cause” in more detail. The argument certainly has its weaknesses. For instance, if everything has a cause then what caused God? When analyzing the strengths of the argument it highlights the fact that things do not bring...
Words: 1573 - Pages: 7
...explanation of the world than theism, and the very existence of God must be dismissed. He believes this because of the presence of evil in the world and states that without definitive “proofs” God therefore cannot exist. McCloskey refers to arguments for God’s existence as “proofs.” I believe that McCloskey stresses this word to much. The term “proof” comes from the field of mathematics and it implicates certainty. For example 5 + 2 = 7 and 2 + 5 = 7 is a math formula that can be proved. It is a formula that can be proven according to the addition property of mathematics. The reality of God is not that simple. One should not look to prove his existence, but one should look to present the ideal that God is the best explanation for the world and life itself. A theist could do this by overlapping multiple ideas and together there is enough strength to present an argument for God being the best explanation for the world. McCloskey presents the following on the cosmological argument: He claims that “the mere existence of the world constitutes no reason for believing in such a being” (McCloskey, H.J., 1968, pg. 51). C. Stephen Evans and R. Zachary Manis present a non-temporal form of the cosmological argument. Their argument can be broken down into three key elements: “(1) Some contingent beings exist. (2) If any contingent beings exist, then a necessary being must exist (because contingent beings require...
Words: 1838 - Pages: 8
...Philosophy of religion Why is there evil in the world created by a God who is moral, all powerful and perfect? God is moral, all powerful and perfect. He is also which none greater can be conceived. Any attribute of God is overwhelmingly superior to anything we can fathom. So when we try to measure and configure god’s motives, we are really setting ourselves in a maze. One argument is that, due to mankind's limited knowledge, humans cannot expect to understand God or God's ultimate plan. When a parent takes an infant to the doctor for a regular vaccination to prevent some childhood disease, it's because the parent cares for and loves that child. The young child, however, will almost always see things very differently. It is argued that just as an infant cannot possibly understand the motives of its parent while it is still only a child, people cannot comprehend God's will in their current physical and earthly state. Now why is there evil in the world if God is so supreme. Augustine had his view on why evil exist if god is so good. Augustine based his theodicy on his reading of key Biblical passages: Genesis 3 and Romans 5:12-20 Genesis 3 is the story of Adam and Eve and their ‘”fall” in the Garden of Eden. In it the snake convinces the woman to eat the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The woman picks the fruit, and passes some to Adam. Because of their disobedience God has them evicted from the garden. In Romans 5 Paul describes...
Words: 1186 - Pages: 5
...Theology Revision Plato Plato lived in Athens in the 5th and 4th Centuries BC He was the student of Socrates and teacher of Aristotle He was a dualist- believed in the body and the soul He believed the soul was more perfect than the body He believed that societies should be run by philosophers He believed the physical world is a pale imitation of the world of the forms The allegory of the cave The prisoners- normal people of society The prisoner who escapes- philosophers, people that thirst to know the real truth The people casting the shadows- the leaders of society- shaping the world without knowing the truth The shadows/statues- what people believe is reality, what they are told to believe, things people deem to be important The cave- a world without knowledge, the physical world/the body The fire- controlled, dim light- limited knowledge. An imitation of the form of the good The journey outside- a difficult journey, acquisition of knowledge The sun- illuminates the true world- form of the good The journey back into the cave- the desire to educate and inform others of the truth The world of the Forms Forms Plato uses the word ‘form’ to describe the true essence of material objects in the world This idea of the ‘form’ exists in a non physical (yet more real) realm that can only be understood by the mind. This is called the world of the forms Plato believed that the forms were interrelated and hierarchical The highest form The ultimate principle...
Words: 5746 - Pages: 23
...ACCEPT OR REJECT THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS AS PROVIDING RATIONALLY CONVINCING ARGUMENTS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. PHIL 3431: Introduction to Philosophy of Religion November 20th, 2012 The Cosmological Argument The cosmological argument is considered to be the relationship between the existence of the world or universe and the existence of a being that created this world or universe and maintains its existence. According to many studies, the cosmological argument comes in two forms: the modal cosmological arguments and the temporal kalam cosmological arguments. The modal cosmological argument The modal cosmological argument, also known as the argument from contingency, suggest that the universe existence requires an explanation. In other words, there must be a cause that can explain why the universe exists now. The modal cosmological argument places the universe as a contingent being. A contingent being is something that requires a cause of existence. On the contrary, the cosmological argument explains a second type of being: a necessary being. A necessary being is something that does not require an explanation or cause of its existence, a being that could not have failed to exist. In conclusion, the ultimate cause of everything that exist must then be a necessary being. The modal cosmological argument places this necessary being in God’s existence. The modal cosmological argument bases on the following premises: 1. If something exists, what it takes for that...
Words: 2119 - Pages: 9
...A) Outline the cosmological argument for the existence of God “ A may be explained by B, and B by C, but in the end there will be some one object on whom all other objects depend” Richard Swinburne. The cosmological argument is an a posteriori argument which therefore basis it’s conclusions on observations and experience; this is difficult to challenge. Over many years, different scholars have added their opinions to Aristotle and Plato’s contributions, making that argument stronger. The most famous version of the cosmological is associated with the Christian apologist Thomas Aquinas. In his Summa theological he sets out to demonstrate that the universe requires an explanation and this explanation demands a necessary and non-contingent being, God. This ides is key at the heart of all cosmological arguments. “The series must start with something, since nothing can come from nothing” Metaphysics. Plato and Aristotle postulated the need for a craftsman for their arguments with the fact of motion, which, they argued, needs a prior agency to motivate it. This mover would, itself, have no further mover, because it would be a primes mover, which is a self-actualising, necessary being. Neither Aristotle nor Plato understood how the universe could exist without such a mover. Aquinas further developed this idea in his first and second way. Aquinas’ first way states that all things are in motion (a state of change: for Aquinas, “motion is the reduction of something from...
Words: 341 - Pages: 2
...INFINITE REGRESS AND THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT I n recent years, there has been a revival of interest in that version o f the Cosmological Proof for God's existence which argues for the n ecessity of an uncaused or first cause. The argument can be p resented as follows: I ) We know that at least some things are caused to come i nto being 2) Either whatever causes something to come into being has i tself been caused to come into being or there is somet hing that causes something to come into being which has n ot itself been caused to come into being 3) But if whatever causes something to come into being has i tself been caused to come into being, there is an infinite series of causes stretching back in time 4) But there cannot be such a series 5) Hence there is something that causes something to come i nto being which has not itself been caused to come into b eing. T h a t is, there is an uncaused cause, and this is G od. N ow the major source of disagreement between the defenders and o pponents of this argument is over whether premise (4) is true, i.e. w hether an infinite series of causes stretching back in time is possible. A n umber of fallacious objections to the possibility of an infinite series have been exposed, 1 but there remains one objection that h as not, and in the opinion of several supporters of the argument, c annot be answered. This is essentially that if there were an infinite series of causes stretching back in time, in order to reach...
Words: 333 - Pages: 2
...Examine the cosmological argument for the existence of God. The cosmological argument is an a posteriori argument which intends to prove that there is an intelligent being that exists; the being is distinct from the universe, explains the existence of the universe, and is omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent and omnibenevolent. The basic notion of cosmological arguments is that the world and everything in it is dependent on something other than itself for its existence. It explains that everything has a cause, that there must have been a first cause, and that this first cause was itself uncaused. Many philosophers have explored the cosmological argument, including Aquinas, in much depth, through his Five Ways in the Summa Theologica. Thomas Aquinas rejected the ontological argument of Anselm, saying that had it been convincing, the existence of God would be self-evident to everyone. He argued that the fact people deny God’s existence is proof enough that it is not in fact self evident. Aquinas believed from faith that God existed and he believed that the real world contained enough evidence for this; Aquinas wrote the Five Ways in order to prove his beliefs. Each ‘way’ of the Five Ways is an exercise of reason, not of faith; they are the classical exposition of natural theology. The first three of the five ways are based on the cosmological argument. The first way that Aquinas proposed to support the cosmological argument regarded the ‘unmoved mover’; he stated that...
Words: 1393 - Pages: 6
