Cosmological Argument Analysis

Lastly, his fourth argument assumes that things can be created by matter therefore if other things say otherwise it would be disregarded (Paley,

Many people wonder about the existence of God and if he truly exists. We have to realize that it is obvious that he exists because of his many creations. Sometimes we think that the world has so much evil so how is God here. Multiple philosophers have made proofs and arguments abut how God really does exist. Philosophers have made arguments that he exists for example Shaun Doyle says that God reveals himself to people in many ways such as that the spirit himself testifies to Christians spirits that we are God’s children, William Lane Craig has found the differences his existence has made, and Pascal Wager’s is an argument that says that believing in God is not on an appeal that he exists, but based on an appeal to self-interest.

During the 1800th century, William Paley, an English philosopher of religion and ethics, wrote the essay The Argument from Design. In The Argument from Design, Paley tries to prove the existence of a supreme being through the development of a special kind of argument known as the teleological argument. The teleological argument is argument by analogy, an argument based on the similarities between two different subjects. This essay purposefully attempts to break down Paley’s argument and does so in the following manner: firstly, Paley’s basis for the teleological argument is introduced; secondly, Paley’s argument is derived and analyzed; thirdly, the connection between Paley’s argument and the existence of a supreme being is made; and

Paley’s made his argument using an analogy to prove the existence of god, using a watchmaker analogy and to image if we found a watch on the ground and could it have been possible for the watch to simply appear randomly, spontaneously on its own. Paley was arguing that the teleology demonstrated by a watch would conclude that it was designed by an intelligent creator with a particular end in mind. While Aquinas has a design argument of his own ,the Teleological argument focuses on the condition that allows for life in the universe to only occur when certain fundamental physical constants are within a very narrow range if one of many fundamental constant are off slightly, then the universe would be unfit for the development of matter and life. Since these things are so finely tuned it appears an intelligent designer may have been involved in making sure these things happened so life could occur that designer Aquinas believes to be

The ontological argument for God’s existence is a work of art resulting from philosophical argumentation. An ontological argument for the existence of God is one that attempts the method of a priori proof, which utilizes intuition and reason alone. The term a priori refers to deductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning is the type of reasoning that proceeds from general principles or premises to derive particular information. The argument works by examining the concept of God, and arguing that it implies the actual existence of God; that is, if we can conceive of God then God exists. However, this type of argument is often criticized as committing a bare assertion fallacy. The bare assertion fallacy is fallacy in formal logic where a premise

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.

The fact that in order to foster the formation of intelligent life, such a specific and precise chain of events had to happen is in itself mind-blowing. For that to happen randomly, and by itself, is so improbable that many use this as a basis for the argument for an omnipotent Creator. For example, when describing the overall makeup of the universe, theoretical physicist and popular science writer Paul Davies, declared, “the impression of design is overwhelming" (Davies, 1988, p. 203). Philosopher Robin Collins argues that the fine-tuning of the universe is more probably explained by design than random chance of a single universe exhibiting all the parameters needed to foster intelligent life. He uses the analogy of people traveling to Mars and finding a domed structure perfectly set up for life to exist. The people would not conclude this biosphere happened to form by chance, but rather they would presume that it was designed by some intelligent being. Of course it is possible that the biosphere was formed by a natural process, however unlikely. The most plausible explanation in this scenario is that it was designed to be that

SWA4: Is the cosmological argument commonsensical? Samuel Clarke and Baron D’Holbach have very different views when it comes to an infinite being. D’Holbach is an atheist who says that believing in a good is not reasonable or innate. Further, he says religion makes people give their attention to something they can never comprehend or experience. Clarke on the other hand believe that there has to have been a being that has exited in all of eternity without a cause a being that just exist because of absolute necessity.

Based on the module reading and from my own experience, the existence of a god is unconfirmed and doubtful. The ontological, cosmological, and teleological arguments supporting the existence of God do not provide empirical evidence that can be decisively attributed to a deity of any sort. The ontological argument proposed by Anselm in which God can be proven to exist through reasoning alone is flawed. Unlike the argument suggests, you cannot simply think something into existence by ascribing that thing with the property of existence as Immanuel Kant pointed out. The cosmological argument is more sound with a level of support by the observable world around us, but still contains a fundamental flaw. The cosmological argument holds that nearly

The existence of God is a question everyone asks himself or herself at one point or another. It is always being questioned. In many ways God can be proven to exist by logical arguments and many of these arguments can be disproved by a similar logic. The most compelling of the proofs that I have read is Anselm’s Ontological Argument. This argument in many ways has goods points about the conceptuality of truth, ideas, thought and how that translates to reality, but is written by someone who already believes in God. It can clearly be seen that Anselm is working from an already established belief and needs support of Aquinas’s five ways to strengthen his argument.

Following the rabbit example with one along a broader scale, if a theist believes that if a substance cannot be produced by anything else, and an atheist would similarly agree, than that substance must inhere in itself, or that, “…if everything is caused by itself or another than God must be a substance, and as a substance, then His existence involves essence. Since God’s essence exists, then so does God.” (Lin, 2007, p. 274) What if an atheist believed that the cosmological argument was unsound because they were quite certain that God did not exist. Given their argument, they would in fact, by rejecting God’s existence, be acknowledging it based on a logical inference suggested by Kelly

Argument for the existence of god have been debated for thousands of years they have been proposed philosophers, scientists and regular individuals and almost every argument has been proposed. The root concept of many philosopher for the existence of god is that he is a prime mover or ultimate creator. Whether it is upholding these values or trying to prove them wrong there has been one universal truth thus far there is an existence that has shaped and influence all the action and beliefs that humans have made for thousands of years.

The existence of God is something that most people take for granted. In your upbringing you are taught that God is the most supreme being, the creator of all, infinite and eternal. Taking into account the type of society in which we live in and the fact that it is usually our parents who teach us about God, most people do not even question his existence. Many philosophers who believe in God have tried to prove his existence using many different types of argument. One of these arguments is the ontological argument. It was made famous by the 11th century philosopher Anselm. The ontological argument has three properties: 1. It is an a priori argument. 2. It treats existence as a property. 3. It is

The idea of God existence has always been a part the history of human. There are always been a different point of view between those who believe in God and those who do not believe in God existence. A French Philosopher, mathematician, and writer Rene Descartes was the one who clarify the dilemma of the existence of God after he doubts everything. In fact, those who have faith in God obviously tend to adhere at one religion. However, the skeptics try to search the answers of God existence through scientific methods. Rene Descartes after doubting everything, he definitely believes of the existence of God. As to proof God existence, Descartes develop several essential arguments which are causal and ontological arguments. The logic of Descartes’

The question of God's existence has been debated in philosophy to great lengths. E.K. Daniel has listed all common philosophical arguments for the existence of God in his essay "A Defense of Theism", consisting of The Ontological Argument, The First-Cause Argument, The Argument of Contingency, The Design Argument, The Moral Argument, The Argument from Religious Experience, and The Natural Law Argument (p. 260). These arguments are familiar to any basic student of philosophy, along with the critiques that have been raised by philosophers such as Ernest Nagel in his essay "The Case for Atheism" (p. 274-283). These arguments have almost reached a virtual impasse, since there seems to be as much rational proof against the existence of God as there is fervor to believe in God. K.D. Ellis states this by saying "They may offer some support for the plausibility of the belief in a god, but they are not sufficiently strong enough to compel our assent to the conclusion that a god exists" (p. 297). This difference of perspective results in theism, atheism and agnosticism.