Cosmological Contention For God Existence Essay

1. The Cosmological Argument for the existence of God is based on the principle of cause and effect. What this basically means is that the universe was the effect of a cause, which was God. One of the oldest and most well known advocates of the Cosmological Argument was Thomas Aquinas who outlines his argument for the existence of God in his article entitled The Five Ways. The first way in his argument is deals with motion. Aquinas says that in order for something to be in motion something had to move it because it is impossible for something to move without the presence of some sort of outside force upon it. Therefore the world around us, nature, and our very existence could not have been put into motion without the influence of the

A third objection to the cosmological argument as a whole is that Aquinas insists that everything has a cause; if that is true, then what caused God? There being an uncaused cause would be a contradiction to Aquinas whole argument that everything has a cause yet God has no cause. But Aquinas defends his argument by saying that only everything in our universe has a cause because everything in our universe is a limited, dependent being. That still would require an uncaused, neither finite, nor dependent being unlike anything in our universe, God. Critics also object that the cosmological argument does not prove a loving and personal God, but Aquinas would probably respond by stating that this wouldn’t prove his argument is wrong, only that it has a limited purpose.

One burning and enduring problem in philosophy to which we have given considerable examination is the question of the existence of God--the superlative being that philosophers have defined and dealt with for centuries. After reading the classic arguments of St. Anselm and St. Thomas Aquinas, the contentious assertions of Ernest Nagel, and the compelling eyewitness accounts of Julian of Norwich, I have been introduced to some of the most revered and referenced arguments for and against God's existence that have been put into text. All of them are well-thought and well-articulated arguments, but they have their holes. The question of God's true existence, therefore, is still not definitively answered and put to rest; the intensity of this

The Cosmological Argument attempts to prove that God exists by showing that there cannot be an infinite number of regressions of causes to things that exist. It states that there must be a final uncaused-cause of all things. This uncaused-cause is asserted to be God. Arguments like this are thought up to recognize why we and the universe exist.

The Key Ideas of the Cosmological Argument for the Existence of God A) The cosmological argument is to prove the existence of god. In this type of argument we are looking at cause and not design. This type of argument is an aposteriori argument because it is based upon experience. Thomas Aquinas puts the key ideas into 3 ways.

The Kalam Cosmological Argument presented by Dr. William Lane Craig states that everything that beings to exist has a cause, the universe began to exist; therefore: the universe has a cause. The Cosmological argument argues that the universe that we live in has a cause and purpose. There must be a creator (God) of the universe because the universe cannot have a cause without something or someone feeling the need to create. In the Craig-Dacey debate Dr. Dacey opening argument or rebuttal was aimed to disprove God’s existence. Dr. Dacey begin to show that the concept of God is self- contradictory.

Anselm’s Ontological argument sets out to not only prove God’s existence, but to show that God’s existence is self-evident. Similar to other ontological arguments, it uses a priori knowledge to argue its validity, meaning that the propositions made are derived from internal reasoning instead of sense experience.

Humans can never know for the certain why the universe was created or what caused it but, we can still create arguments and theories to best explain what might have created the universe. The cosmological argument is another idea to prove the existence of god. Many philosophers debate wheatear the cosmological argument is valid. The cosmological argument starts off quite simply: whatever exists must come from something else. Nothing is the source of its own existences, nothing is self-creating []. The cosmological argument states at some point, the cause and effect sequence must have a beginning. This unexpected phenomenal being is god. According to the argument, god is the initial start of the universe as we know it. Though nothing is

In the first version of the Ontological argument, Anselm starts with the definition of God. Anselm states that God is defined as that being in which nothing greater can be thought.

The cosmological argument for the existence of God is based on causation and the world having a beginning. It holds that everything that exists has a cause and there must have been an initial cause. The argument attempts to prove the existence of God by making an inference from the world. It starts from the reality that things exist and then follows that there is a cause for the existence of these things. It acknowledges that something caused the universe to exist and some thing is currently keeping it existing.

The Cosmological Argument, in my opinion, does provide "proof" that a God or Superhuman being exist. According Rowe (2007), the Cosmological Argument lies with the fundamental premise of Principle of Sufficient Reason or PSR (Rowe, 2007). However, Rowe would argue that no one has succeeded at showing  that PSR is an assumption that most of us share (Rowe, 2007, p.32). As far as "proof", I believe the argument does a "sufficient" job at proving God's existence using a logical argument of deductive validity. Deductive validity identifies the premise of the argument asking only one question, If the premises were true, would its conclusion have to be true (Rowe, 2007, p. 22). A yes or no answer to this vital question will help you to reach a conclusion.

Supporters of the argument could use the idea that God is unique and outside the laws of nature. But even so, this point weakens the argument as there is no proof of the attributes of God. Many may ask these questions: Why does the universe have to be caused? Why cannot it always have been there?

In Anselm’s The Ontological Argument, he analyzes the definition of god in his own version of the ontological argument. He claims that god cannot exist solely in the mind without also existing in reality. God is too great a being to be only understood in the mind without existing, which would make him less than great and contradict the understanding. By understanding God, we prove that he exists in reality, and cannot deny his existence, whether it be in the material world or in the

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.

For centuries, philosophers have been concerned with proving the existence of god, and from this has sprouted many arguments attempting to prove or disprove god’s existence from a wide variety of different perspectives. St. Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury has proved a true pioneer in the study of the philosophy of religion. Anselm provided one of the most crucial and influential solutions to solving the mystery of god’s existence, the Ontological Argument. While there were many different arguments (along with their originators) discussed during the religion presentation, it will be Anselm’s that we focus on. While Anselm’s ontological argument is seen as one of the most influential arguments created about god’s existence, it is not