...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
...Explain Aquinas’ Cosmological argument. Aquinas Cosmological argument is an attempted proof of the existence of God working from the undeniable fact that the universe exists. He formulated his argument in three ways. His first formulation of the Cosmological argument was the argument from motion. He argued that everything in the universe is in a state of constant motion and change. He saw change as the motion of an object turning from a state of potentiality into a state of actuality and thought that something must cause the object to change between these states. He goes on to say there must have once been something that performed the function of an unmoved mover; for were this not the case there could be nothing to set all other objects in the universe into their courses of motion and change. Therefore Aquinas concludes that this unmoved mover is what everyone else refers to as God. Aquinas second formulation uses the argument from cause. He argued that everything in the universe has an efficient cause, nothing is its own cause. Therefore everything is caused by something else. However there cannot be an infinite regression of causes because if there were no First Cause which was a sufficient cause of itself in itself then there could have been no following causes, and nothing would exist today. Because the universe does exist we must therefore accept the existence of an uncaused cause and this cause is God. Aquinas third formulation uses the argument from contingency. He...
Words: 568 - Pages: 3
...Outline the cosmological argument for the existence of God (21 marks) The cosmological argument aims to prove the existence of God whilst also providing an explanation for the beginning of the universe, with different views coming from various scholars. It is an a posteriori argument, meaning we can draw conclusions from experiences based on what we see around us, although it is not a fact. Despite the separate interpretations, the cosmological argument revolves around a first cause which started the universe. This cause is what we come to know as God, and the scholars mainly focus on different ways of proving his existence by looking at the world around us. When looking at the argument, Thomas Aquinas is the driving force behind most of its foundations and ideas. His first way from five in his book ‘Summa Theologica’, he outlines the need for a first cause because of the motion we see in the world. Nothing inanimate can move itself, and requires another force in order for it to go from potentiality to actuality. But everything has to be moved by something else which would go on infinitely, so something must have been the first mover. This first mover is understood to be God, who set the world in motion when he created it. This mirrors Aristotle’s ideas about planetary motion, and Aquinas believed God continues to keep the world functioning and moving. Furthermore, Aquinas’ second way also represents the cosmological argument as the way of causation. When you look at everything...
Words: 619 - Pages: 3
...existence of a supernatural being. Many philosophers have made their attempts to justify the existence of God but one of the most fascinating is the modern cosmological argument made by Dr. William Lane Craig which is based on the premise that the universe is finite. In this paper, I will describe his argument for the cosmological argument and oppose his argument. The original concept of the cosmological argument originated with a Muslim theologian named al-Ghazali who lived in the 12th century as a response to Greek philosophers....
Words: 1292 - Pages: 6
...The existence of god has been a question that has overwhelmed humankind since they began to think logically. Many philosophers have argued that there is a possibility that there is a god or there is no god, or that there may even be different types of gods. It was many years ago when every person wanted to prove the existence of God. Some people argued that God exist and proved that by numerous philosophical theories or scientific fundamentals and religion explanations. On the other hand, other people do not believe in God existence and these people proved that by several speculations and scientific points. Nevertheless, it is difficult to say whether god exists or not because there is a lack of knowledge or limited knowledge considering the issue. God is an infinite essence whereas human being is only a finite substance. I think since the idea of God cannot have originated in himself, that God must be the cause of this idea and must therefore necessarily exist. However, there are three time-honored arguments for the existence of God. From those three arguments, two of...
Words: 1052 - Pages: 5
...and Moral Reasoning Zummuna Davis October 3, 2012 When you ask a human how the universe evolved some will say that man created the universe. Next question, how can man create something in outerspace? Now the room is silent, why is that? How can you answer a question that cannot be answered. So why do you need proof that God exist, what will that prove, that people are actually worshipping God, instead of a what people say is an inanimate object. In the beginning God created the heaven and earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters (Genesis 1:1-2). There are many traditional proofs for the existence of God, and we will look at three, the argument from design, the ontological argument and the cosmological argument. There are many ways that the universe might have been, it might have had different arrangement of planets and stars; it might have begun with a bigger or smaller big bang; the vast majority of these universes would not have existence of life. We are fortunate indeed to have a universe that does. The argument of design, picture looking at a rectangular skyscraper and examined the structure within it, you might think that this intricate structure was not the outcome of mere chance, but had been designed. Now look at the universe, is it possible that such an intricate stricture, from the orbits off planets around the sun to the cells...
Words: 1991 - Pages: 8
...philosophical views about religion, there are many different arguments about the aspect of a religion. Some of the aspects argue whether or not God exists, how we can be certain if He does, and how we can be certain if He does not exist. When looking into these philosophical arguments some think there is a need to separate yourself from your religious beliefs in search of true knowledge, but others think you should stay true to your religious beliefs. H. J. McCloskey is an atheist, and has written an article about how atheists view...
Words: 1873 - Pages: 8
...The cosmological argument is a relevant topic in today’s society as for centuries people have always questioned the universe/god and how they came into existence. Many people over the years have put forward arguments for and against the existence of god and whether or not he created the universe. The first strength of the cosmological argument is that Aristotle said “nothing can come from nothing, i.e. everything must be caused by something else” this inspired Aquinas to write the argument from causation. God is self-causing and therefore he doesn’t need an explanation. Aquinas believed that because we cannot have infinite regress then there must have been a first cause that was uncaused and that cause is god. The first weakness is that...
Words: 318 - Pages: 2
...Existence of God Whether one is religious or a non-believer, theist or atheist, there are certain things in nature that even scientists can’t seem to definitively explain. In Dr. Bert Thompson’s study, he gives three very arguable cases of proof for the existence of God. The author delves into the three main arguments for the existence of God, which scientists have not been able to completely explain away with logic or reasoning, being able to present the views of both sides without necessarily becoming hostile towards the one or the other. The three cases that are presented for argument are the Cosmological Argument, the Teleological Argument, and the Anthropological Argument. In this paper, I will examine the cases and explain the benefits each gives towards the belief of a Supreme Being. The first case presented was the Cosmological Argument. It is explained that the Cosmological Argument addresses the fact that the Universe is here and therefore must be explained. In the book, Dr. Thompson explains that the Universe is a contingent entity, one that is dependent upon something outside of itself to explain its existence. For scientists, and atheists alike, there is the belief of cause and effect, or rather the Law of Casualty. This law states that every material effect must have an adequate antecedent cause. For scientists, and philosophers alike, this is the foundation of their core beliefs. There can be no effects without an adequate cause, this is simply unknown...
Words: 1228 - Pages: 5
...the existence of God, there are numerous teachings and arguments, some more rational than others, the classical arguments being the most well known to all. The claim in all these arguments uses a non-religious approach to logically reason the existence of God, rather than argue on the premise of faith to obtain a rational belief; a belief reasoning as justification. The classical arguments are divided into what is considered empirical and rational arguments, with every individual finding their own reasoning to relate to them. In this essay, I will explore the extent of how the classical arguments can proves God existence, and why some people counter-argue they cannot. The first of the classical arguments being Anselm’s Ontological argument, an argument attempting to prove God’s existence through abstract reasoning alone. The argument is entirely a priori as it does not include real evidence or anything factual, seeking to demonstrate that God exists based on the concept of God alone. The outline of the argument is that because we have an idea of God, an idea of a being which no greater can be thought, therefore God must exist. The argument relates to three concepts: the concept of God, perfection and of existence. The three concepts associate with one another, arguing that perfection is part of the concept of God, and that perfection entails existence, therefore the concept of God entails God’s existence. Anselm’s argument is set on the basis of a conception of God as “that than...
Words: 2038 - Pages: 9
...That is the question we face! For many years Theists and Atheist have debated this question for many years along with their central views and beliefs that we as human being rely on as it relates to Life and God. The Point of views and debates center around the Cosmological Argument, the Teleological argument (argument from Design) and the most debated argument as it relates to this topic called the Problem with evil? When questioning wither or not God Exist these traditional arguments play significant roles in investigating and proving or discrediting someone’s view or stance on this specific Philosophical belief. As you read McCloskey article “On Being an Atheist” he argues the Theist stance who believe in the Existence of God from the perspective view of an Atheist. McCloskey in writing this Article is not trying to discredit their belief in the Existence of God, but to raise questions, doubts and uncertainties concerning their arguments on which they stand on to prove their belief by ultimately concluding that the Theist arguments are not valid and should be disregarded as evidence to prove their belief in the existence of God. The problem with McCloskey argument against the argument of Theistic View is the Theist argument is not to literally prove their belief concretely on the existence of God, but there view is design to give us what is called “Best Explanation”. According to Forman Best Explanation “is to Arrive at a view you can live with, to discover which view offer the...
Words: 2421 - Pages: 10
...such question is whether or not God exists. This is the very question that has grasped the imagination of humanity since the birth of reason, and the same question that has plagued scientists and philosophers without coming close to an accepted conclusion. God is a word that means different things to different people. The definition for God, according to most monotheistic religions is the creator and ruler of the universe, and the source of all moral authority. When it comes to the possibility of God's existence, the Bible states that there are people who have seen sufficient evidence, but they have suppressed the truth about God. Up to this day, there are many differing opinions as to whether a God exists or not. The great controversy has led to my personal belief that God exists through the teleological, ontological and cosmological arguments. These major ideas help to back up my statement that God exists. Based on our everyday experiences, just about everything seems to have a beginning. William Paley was a philosopher during the eighteenth century who is best known for his exposition of the teleological argument for the existence of God. Derived from the Greek word "telos" which means "design or purpose", the teleological argument proposes that God must exist because the inner workings of the universe are too complicated and precise to just have come about on it's own. Through often confused with the argument from simple analogy, the watchmaker argument from Paley is a...
Words: 1973 - Pages: 8
...believe in all that is said that he had done. McCloskey stated in page 62 that, “Philosopher colleagues attribute to much importance to the role of the proofs of the existence of God as a basis for religious belief, that most theists does not come to believe in God as a result of reflecting on the proofs, but come to religion as a result of other reasons and factors.” (McCloskey, 1968) McCloskey used three arguments to support his claims; these three arguments are cosmological argument, teleological argument, and Argument from design. McCloskey had went on speaking about the cosmological argument and about the universe. McCloskey was more into the idea of a big bang. This can be broken down into three ideas from Evans and Manis on their non-temporal form of cosmological argument. The first one is the contingent beings meaning that there is a lot of evidence proving that a powerful being like God exists but there is no real reason as to why God or the universe does exists. The second one is that there are no claims about how old the universe is so this would lead to that the "universe may have always existed." (Evans&Manis, 2009, p. 69) God origin...
Words: 1979 - Pages: 8
...existence has been discussed throughout time. H.J. McCloskey, an atheist, expounds on this matter in his article “On Being an Atheist.” Of course this article is from the atheist point of view. McCloskey alleges that atheism is a more agreeable 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...
Words: 1838 - Pages: 8
...that. In fact in his article, McCloskey not only bashes the classical arguments for God’s existence using the problem of evil, but also offers it as the reason why one should not hold to the belief in all-knowing, all-good, all-perfect, all-powerful God. However, as seen in the arguments against McCloskey’s beliefs in atheism, such a belief is not only a sin against God, but has devastating effects to all of mankind. McCloskey claims that arguments, named “proofs” in his article, offer no significant evidence to establish a case for an omnibenevolent God, and therefore should be disregarded.1 However, McCloskey is using the classical arguments the wrong way and in a manner they were not designed to be used. The problem with referring to the classical arguments for God’s existence as “proofs” implies a sense of certainty. These arguments were not meant to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of God, as McCloskey believes. Rather these arguments take a best explanation approach for the existence of God. They simply argue the best explanation man has for certain effects within the universe is the existence of God. That is not to say the existence of God is the only explanations for these effects. These arguments are certainly defeasible, meaning there is a possibility one could be wrong about these arguments and/or one could provide a counter claim that would defeat the argument. However, no one argument gets us to...
Words: 2208 - Pages: 9
