...The Kalam Cosmological Argument: (KCA) Of the things debated in society, perhaps nothing is more hotly contested than the existence of a God. Over the course of time there have been many arguments made from many different angles. For example, an argument in favor of existence is the teleological argument also known as “fine tuning,” or the “argument from design” argues that the universe is so organized as to suggest the necessity of a designer. (1) Likewise there are many arguments against the existence of a God; perhaps the most well know is the “problem of evil” which argues if there is an omniscient, omnipotent and morally perfect being, he (or she) would know where evil is, have the power to destroy it, and being morally perfect would...
Words: 929 - Pages: 4
...The difference between God and the universe is that the universe has a creation in time. The argument explains that everything has a beginning in time and they also have a cause for their existence. With the universe having a cause, that cause of existence is God. However, those would argue the cause and or beginning in time for God. Being that everything has both a cause and a beginning in time. For God, However His existence is an uncaused cause. Others would also draw into question the proof of having a beginning of time for the Universe. There are mathematical and science behind proving the Universe not being infinite. If time were infinite individuals would never reach their present (Holt,...
Words: 1122 - Pages: 5
...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
...The Kalam Cosmological Argument The temporal, kalam cosmological argument, dates back to medieval Muslim philosophers such as al-Kindi and al-Ghazali. It has recently been restored to popularity by William Lane Craig. Like all cosmological arguments, the kalam cosmological argument is an argument from the existence of the world or universe to the existence of God. The existence of the universe, such arguments claim, stands in need of explanation. The only adequate explanation, the arguments suggest, is that it was created by God. What distinguishes the kalam cosmological argument from other forms of cosmological argument is that it rests on the idea that the universe has a beginning in time. Modal forms of the cosmological argument are consistent with the universe having an infinite past. According to the kalam cosmological argument, however, it is precisely because the universe is thought to have a beginning in time that its existence is thought to stand in need of explanation. This argument has the following logical structure: The Kalam Cosmological Argument (1) Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence. (2) The universe has a beginning of its existence. Therefore: (3) The universe has a cause of its existence. (4) If the universe has a cause of its existence then that cause is God. Therefore: (5) God exists. The first premise of the argument is the claim that everything that begins to exist has a cause of its existence. In order...
Words: 451 - Pages: 2
...Explain how the existence of God may be proved by Cosmological arguments (30) There are many arguments that can be displayed to provide evidence for the existence of God. The cosmological argument, also known as the first cause argument, is a posteriori argument. This means that the evidence used to prove the argument can be observed by anyone, which makes the argument more accessible and user friendly. The argument is also an inductive argument, which means that it can have many possible conclusions; not necessarily God. This argument is a strong argument, which tries to deduce the existence of God through cause and effect. It’s based upon the principle that everything must have been caused by something in order to exist. The cosmological argument has long history, going back to the philosophers of Plato, Aristotle and Leibniz. All of these philosophers may have had different ideas about God, although they all agreed that the universe is not self-explanatory and must have had a sole cause in order for it to come into existence. Plato was an Ancient Greek Philosopher who was considered as the father of modern philosophy. In fact, one of the earliest forms of a cosmological argument was found in Plato’s writings: Timaeus and The Laws. In The Laws, we see the argument for the existence of God being proposed as the very fact that the universe exists and it also goes on to discuss the principles of change and motion. Plato is proposing the necessity of a ‘self moved’ mover, implying...
Words: 1328 - Pages: 6
...The Cosmological Argument The Cosmological argument infers that the existence of the universe is due to the existence of God. Plato bought about one of the oldest arguments between 428-327 BCE. Plato believed that there is a self moving principle from which all change and motion originated. This principle is the core which is responsible for the world. Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century developed Plato’s views; however this development was with a theistic principle. The first three of the five ways produced was about the cosmological argument. Aquinas believed in the god of classical theism. The cosmological argument is a probability argument because it’s an a posteriori argument which takes its principles from an observation of the world. Its premises are drawn from experience and reach an inductive conclusion but are synthetic. Aquinas was a famous 13th century philosopher who came up with one of the most famous appliable cosmological arguments. These arguments were the first 3 of the 5 ways as mentioned above in the ‘Summa Theologica’. Aquinas’ first way referred to motion. Aquinas said “something’s are in motion. Now whatever is moved is moved by another…. Therefore it is necessary at a first mover…. Everyone understands to be God”. Aquinas further explained this as the reduction of something from potentiality to actuality. For example, fire which is actually hot, changes wood, which is potentially hot, to the state of actually being hot and vice versa and it must be something...
Words: 1051 - Pages: 5
...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
...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
...The cosmological argument (i) Examine the view that the cosmological argument provides an explanation for the world and is a trustworthy basis for belief in the existence of God. (21) The cosmological argument, also known as the first cause argument, is a classical argument for the existence of God. The word cosmological comes from the Greek for order and it is an inductive argument as the premises are true but the conclusion may not be, and it is also synthetic where the truth is determined by experience and needs to be proven. It is also a posteriori and also based on natural theology. The Cosmological argument finds its answer for the start of the universe through causes, meaning everything is caused by something, or everything is dependent on something else. The argument attempts to find proof for God’s existence stating that as something cannot come from nothing God must exist in order for anything and everything else to exist. The origins of the cosmological argument come from Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle. Plato 428-347 BC records one of the earliest versions of the Cosmological arguments in his book of ‘Laws’. Plato writes about the argument through an exchange between an Athenian and Clianis. The Athenian attempts to prove the existence of the gods by arguing that, of all the different types of motion, the motion “which can move itself” is “necessarily the earliest and mightiest of all changes”. It is clear from his argument that infinite regress...
Words: 1053 - Pages: 5
...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
...have debated extensively on the existence or the nonexistence of free will in nature.one of this philosophical figure is David Hume, he maintains that humans are free because of decisions and their actions. This is so because though determined, they are determined by our individual motives. He demonstrated that determinism is a very integral part to the existence of individual free will. This therefore means that because our actions being determined causally by our motives and character human beings are morally responsible and are free willed. This then becomes a point of objection because if everything is caused, then what we decide is itself caused. Hume argues that human motives and desire is the Couse of their decisions. Determinism argument is not that we are free but that free will exists. The other philosopher who contributed this debate is Thomas Hobbes. He had a slightly different view on determinism and free will from those held by Hume. He said that God is the ultimate origin of every action, but if humans are not physically required to do any action, there is free will. Hobbes developed his thesis in name of liberty vs. necessity, as opposed free will vs. outwardly determined will. The order in which events followed leading to an individual being blown off a cliff by the wind can be said to have caused that event that was the necessary consequence of a sequence of causes. If person jumped off the cliff would also have a sequence of roots which made it to happen, but...
Words: 1165 - Pages: 5
...The Cosmological argument argues for the existence of God a posteriori based on the apparent order in the universe. For Aristotle, the existence of the universe needs an explanation, a cause, as it could not have come from nothing. Nothing comes from nothing so since there is something, there must have been some other thing that is its cause. Aristotle rules out an infinite progression of causes, so, that led to the conclusion that there must be a First Cause. Likewise with motion, there must have been a first cause; Aristotle calls this the ‘Prime Mover’. There is a God, says Aristotle -for how else does motion begin? Whilst this argument does generally offer some support for the existence of God, it does not prove his existence. Aquinas believed that, since the universe is God's creation, evidence of God's existence can be found in his creation using intellect and reason, as such a concept of God is beyond all direct human experience. Hence, he devised his 'Five Ways,' 5 a posteriori arguments for the existence of God, based on our empirical experience of the universe. The Cosmological argument rests on the first three of Aquinas' Five Ways. The first way is called the argument from motion or ‘change’. It is in this first way that Aquinas follows Aristotle’s ‘prime mover’ thesis. The first way (The 'Kalam' argument) follows as: • Everything in the world is moving or changing • Nothing can move or change by itself • There cannot be an infinite regress of things changing other...
Words: 949 - Pages: 4
...Title 1: Is there good evidence for or against the existence of God? Throughout the ages, the topic of religion has always been discussed and argued over. Some people will always argue that God does exist, whilst others will argue that he doesn’t. Firstly I would like to start my argument with the famous 13th century philosopher, Thomas Aquinas. Aquinas’ argument is known as the cosmological argument. This is the idea of: the unmoved mover, the uncaused causer and idea of contingency, these three arguments are all a posteriori (based on the evidence in the universe around us). The unmoved mover is the concept that, in theory (is logically acceptable even for an atheist), that nothing can be in motion without something first putting it into motion. This argument is very similar to Aristotle’s, which is the idea that everything that changes shape, temperature or simply into something else must be changed by something. Aquinas argued that one thing leading to another infinitely, must be wrong. Something must have been there to cause the first movement. This is why Aquinas rejects the idea of infinite regress, as he believes, that something must have set the whole chain of reactions off, for example something has to push the first domino for the chain reaction to start, and this being for Christians is the unmoved mover or in other terms God. However, many atheists reject this theory as they believe that the idea of infinite regress is very plausible. For example Aquinas...
Words: 1571 - Pages: 7
...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
...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
