...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
...countless theories to prove the existence of a Supreme Being. Following the three different arguments, defended and criticized by numerous philosophers, the ontological, cosmological, and teleological argument are indisputable proof of the existence of God. The idea of God has been around for thousands of...
Words: 1527 - Pages: 7
...philosophical arguments in the book is the Ontological Argument. Ontological Argument is highly recognized as one of the most remarkable arguments ever set forth not just an argument for God’s existence but a purely analytic argument. Ontological argument was regarded as the most intriguing of all arguments for theism. It also regarded as family of arguments. This particular argument is also called “a priori” argument. This does not rely mainly on the facts on observable world. But , it tries to show that the existence of God comes from the very definition of God itself as the most perfect being without using facts. An “a priori” argument about God’s existence depends on how we define God. The point of this argument is very crucial because, if the Ontological Argument proves to be valid, it is not just the mere existence of God is established, but more significantly, also traditional attributes that theists believe God to have. Nonetheless, the Ontological argument has been influential that it has both earned numerous passionate critics and defender of various philosophical learning from the time it was advocated until today. One of them is Immanuel Kant who is believed to have delivered a fatal blow to the this argument by pointing out that “existence” is not the real predicate. The problem to say “God exists” does not tell us anything about God. The use of the word exist does not add anything new to our understanding of God. Another argument is also the Cosmological Argument. The...
Words: 1246 - Pages: 5
...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 in your bloodstream could all have happened by chance? Surly, this enormously complex structure has been designed, and the being that designed it must be God. Charles Darwin argues that to be proof of God could be the result of years of evolutionary change. I diagree with Darwin argument, how can the proof of...
Words: 1991 - Pages: 8
...The Cosmological Argument An important argument to try and prove the existence of God is the Cosmological Argument brought on by observations of the physical universe, made by Saint Thomas Aquinas, a thirteenth century Christian philosopher. The cosmological argument is a result from the study of the cosmos; Aquinas borrows ideas from Aristotle to make this systematically organized argument. Aquinas’ first point begins with the observation that everything is moving. Aquinas’ says that everything that moves must be moved by another moving thing, which has to be moved by another moving thing and so on. This cannot be infinite though, because consequently the motion of the series would have no origin, and the origin of this series cannot be moving because then there would have to be something moving it. Therefore, God, being a perfect, unmoved, uncaused being, would have to be the unmoving origin, “The First Mover”, of the series of moving things. The second point made by Aquinas’ is that everything is caused and what is caused to exist has to be caused by another thing because nothing can cause its own self to exist. This chain of caused things caused by another thing cannot be endless because that would mean there would be no beginning to cause the existence therefore, the existence of the origin of this chain of caused things would have to be uncaused. So God would have to be the first uncaused, non dependent origin of all the other existing caused things. Regarding Aquinas’...
Words: 654 - Pages: 3
...Arguments About God The question of God’s existence has plagued people across the planet as long as we have existed. It has shaped our lives and civilizations as a whole. Cosmological arguments for the existence of god are some the oldest. They have been supported by theorists such as Aristotle and Plato and philosophers throughout history. “They all begin with the empirical fact that the universe exists—and end with the conclusion that only God could be responsible for this fact” (63). While they take different forms, they all have this basic structure. Several of their forms were developed by St. Thomas Aquinas, one was his famous was the first-cause argument. It explains that everything that happens has a cause. So something must have been the first cause, which causes the second, and so on. God must be the first cause. Arguments against Aquinas’ question the idea that an infinite regress could not exist. Philosophers, like David Hume, state the universe needs no beginning, it could just be eternal. “The universe may have simply always been” (67). While cosmological appeals stand on the evidence mainly of experience, ontological arguments stand solely on logic. St. Anselm, originator of this theory, described god as “that which no greater can be conceived” (Oppy). He reasoned that nothing can be greater than a being that which no greater can be conceived therefore that being (God) exists. There are many objections to ontological arguments. One general criticism is that...
Words: 432 - Pages: 2
...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
...In The short Story on Being an Atheist, MCcloskey argues that the cosmological proof, the teleological proof and the Ontological argument should be abandoned because they do not established with any degree of certainty, that God does exist. The cosmological argument is used to prove the existence of a necessary or eternal Creator. Philosophers argue that because the universe exists, some God like being had to cause it to come into existence. It was established that everything that exist had to have a beginning that caused them to exist, and in their opinion that cause was God who is outside of the universe. The Teleological arguments are arguments from the order in the universe to the existence of God. They are also known as arguments to design. These arguments purport to prove the existence of God from empirical facts, the premise being that the universe shows evidence of order and hence design. The Ontological arguments is a priori argument for the existence of God, asserting that as existence is a perfection, and as God is conceived of as the most perfect being, then God must exist. With MCcloskey or any atheist they offer no evidence on how the universe came into existence scientifically or otherwise. On the Cosmological Argument MCcloskey says that the “mere existence of the world constitutes no reason for believing in such a being.” But according to Evans and Manis the cause of the universe is necessary because any explanation of any contingent being’s existence...
Words: 324 - Pages: 2
...Study Guide: Lesson 18 Arguments for the Existence of God Lesson Overview: In this lesson, we arrive at 1 of the most important questions of the course for Christians: Do we have good reasons to believe that God exists? Today, many are claiming that there is no evidence for God’s existence and those who believe in God are just deluding themselves. However, this lesson will show that some very interesting arguments have been developed throughout the history of philosophy that demonstrate that the theist is within his epistemic rights in believing in God. While the case is not 100% certain (few things are in philosophy), it is certainly reasonable in the absence of any contrary evidence to hold that God exists as the best explanation for certain effects we observe in creation. Tasks: View and take notes of the presentation: “Arguments for God’s Existence.” Read “The Absurdity of Life without God” by William Lane Craig. This reading by Christian philosopher William Lane Craig is titled the “The Absurdity of Life without God.” In this powerful argument, Craig seriously considers the ramifications for us if in fact there really is no God. I assign it to my students on campus and they always tell me it is their favorite reading of the semester. I think you will really enjoy it. It is not a difficult reading and is very powerful on a personal level. While it does not prove God's existence, it does add positive epistemic evidence for the cumulative case for God as...
Words: 704 - Pages: 3
...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 more sophisticated design argument that attempts to avoid...
Words: 1973 - Pages: 8
...Descartes Exam Questions & Notes (PHIL 1F90) Give a detailed account of Descartes’ systematic doubt or methodic doubt in Meditation I making certain to distinguish between real doubts and hypothetical or metaphysical doubts. Then explain how Descartes dispels each of these doubts during the course of the subsequent Meditations beginning with the cogito in Meditation 2. A methodic or systematic doubt refers to the common sense or naïve realism. So common sense or naïve realism is the belief that all knowledge comes from or through the senses. Naïve realism are things that are exactly as they appear to be and they appear to be exactly the way they are; a teacup for example. It’s possible to doubt naïve realism in that senses are not always truthful. The difference between real and hypothetical or metaphysical doubt is that Real Doubt are doubts we actually have such as those that really do happen; for example, things that happen sometimes, occasionally, or once in a while. Metaphysical Doubt on the other hand are doubts that could happen. It’s like a logical extension of real doubt, logical possibilities for example “let us assume, what if, I will therefore suppose that.” Sometimes is also considered a real doubt for example “Sometimes my senses do deceive me.” It’s important to note that external conditions are not ideal. Descartes discusses the lunatic hypothesis and the dream hypothesis. He says that in a lunatic hypothesis internal conditions are not ideal since a lunatic...
Words: 1441 - Pages: 6
...Let’s face it, our opinions are going to be biased. Some believe in God, some believe in a higher power, some do not believe at all. So the way that we interpret these articles are all going to be different. I for one do not believe in God, mostly because why would ‘the greatest being’ in all the world decide that war, famine, disease and death are good things to have for his creations. The Ontological argument was the lease convincing argument. God is not perfect, God makes mistakes. The Cosmological Argument was easy to read and did not make me laugh as I tried to pick through them. Paley’s Teleological argument was also believable, but it and the Cosmological argument are both similar. The first ontological (a word that relates to the branch of metaphysics that studies the nature of existence), argument for the existence of God was established by the Benedictine monk known as Anselm. Anselm defines God by saying God is that “which nothing greater can be conceived.” God is perfection and the greatest possible being. But it has a number of consequences. One of them is that it becomes impossible to demonstrate that God is not possible. How are you supposed to debunk him if he is perfect? God is said to have omnipotence, but can God create a round square? Can he defy logic?...
Words: 585 - Pages: 3
...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
...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
...explain the philosophers view points on the religion of God. There are a few arguments of which existence is the strongest. It will explain many aspects on science and religion, atheism, moral and human freedom on God’s existence. Believing in God and believing in God’s existence can have many aspects with different views from philosophers, the arguments will explain which philosopher is more compelling than the other. When it comes to the existence of God, some philosophers believe that it is necessary to have proof and some believe that proof is not necessary if we have faith. One philosopher named, Thomas Aquinas believed that God is from faith and first cause is the proof of God. Let’s take a look at what Thomas had to say, “that the existence of God is not demonstrable: that God's existence is an article of faith, and that articles of faith are not demonstrable, because the office of demonstration is to prove, but faith pertains (only) to things that are not to be proven, as is evident from the Epistle to the Hebrews, 11.” (Paul Halsall, 1988.) Therefore, I don’t believe that we need proof of God’s existence. I agree with Thomas that God is faith. No, proving God’s existence is not necessary because God is faith, we have to believe in God to have the faith, If we do not believe in God then we might try to prove him, but will not get anywhere. There are arguments on the existence of God. The ontological proof explains a good reason why it’s necessary to have proof of God....
Words: 1578 - Pages: 7
