The western conception of god is defined as the superme being that is all-powerful, all-knowing, omnipresence, perfection, all-loving and most kind. Although monotheism like Christian believe God which is perfect existed and they propose several arguments to prove God’ existence, however there are no evidence to show that god actually exist. Atheists suggested those arguments provide insufficient reason to believe. Furthermore, some arguments propose that it is possible to disprove the existence of God, or of certain characteristics attributed to God. This article will be discuss the limitation of some arguments for the existence of god and propose some arguments against god’ existence.
limitation of arguments for the existence of god
…show more content…
Thought this argument, it is not necessary to find the physical evidence of God’s existence as we can prove God’s existence by logic.
However, the successful of this argument is controversial. Critics argue the statement is not persuasive.There are some general objections to ontological arguments. First, existence is not a characteristics of perfection. Rene‘s premise stated that it is more perfect to exist than not to exist. However, it seem that it is more prefect that Hitler or devils not to exist, therefore his second premise has problem. Furthermore, Immanuel Kant proposed that existence is not a predicate because it is not the essence of God. If existence is a not predicate, both God that exists to a God that does not are the same and they can’t greater than each other. Third, ontological argument is begging the question, which is statement is assumed to be true without evidence, since the premise that god is the most perfect being is yet to be proved.
cosmological Arguments
Cosmological argument is an argues of the first cause of the universe. Thomas Aquinas adapted this argument and proposed every contingent must have a cause, therefore the beginning of the universe must had a cause, He stated that the cause is the necessary being, which mean God. Thus, God exist.
However, the argument did n’t not explain the reason of the first cause is
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
Throughout many centuries philosophers have argued over the existence of God. In today’s society many people tend to hesitate in believing in a God because of the new scientific discoveries. For example, in the mid 1990s scientists built the Hubble telescope which revealed that there were billions of galaxies in our universe, this discovery led some people to question how can one divine being create so much and yet have a personal connection with everyone in the world. Which, in result, may take some scientific explanation to strengthen one’s belief in God, but for those who believe there is a benevolent God they do not need science to show proof that he exists because of their morals and beliefs they have been raised to follow. In this paper I will prove that God does exist by explaining the ontological, cosmological, and design argument.
1. Examine the strengths and weaknesses of the argument for the existence of God based on religious experience. (18) 2. ‘The argument merely indicates the probability of God and this is of little value to a religious believer.’ Discuss. (12)
Summarize and give an example for either the Cosmological or Teleological Proof for God’s existence.
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
1. Because of man’s ignorance and curiosity, arguments for the existence of God have been made over the years. Basically, these arguments are divided into two large groups i.e. logical and metaphysical. Actually, these arguments seek to prove that the existence of a being or having faith with at least one attribute that only God could have is logically necessary.
God’s existence cannot be proved nor disproved, but this is an attempt to refute the existence of this all-powerful, all-knowing, all-good being through an analysis of arguments and theories that try to prove or insinuate His reality.
There are many proofs for the existence of God, but maybe none are as famous as St. Anselm's Ontological argument. The Ontological argument is addressing God, as a prayer. Anselm analyzes the very idea of God to prove that he exists. There are two versions of Anselm's Ontological argument, and both attempt to show that God must exist. Despite the many critics that Anselm faced including Guanilo, and St. Thomas Aquinas, the Ontological argument continues to be one of the most famous arguments for the existence of God that provides support for those who believe in God.
In conclusion if one wants to hold the Cosmological Argument to prove the existence of God, then the proof of the principle of sufficient reason needs to have more evidence. The principles of sufficient reason are what make up the premises of Cosmological Argument in which have no evidence of being true. Therefore one cannot use the Cosmological Argument to prove the existence of God, until the principle of sufficient reason has more evidence to back its
The debate of the existence of God had been active since before the first philosopher has pondered the question. Anselm’s Ontological Argument was introduced during the 11th century and had stood deductively valid until the 18th century. Then there are the arguments to aim disprove God, such as the Argument from Evil.
The philosophical arguments presented in this document are not of religious text, nor scientific observation or established fact. Rather the premise of this God proof is bring together and share the various theories on which other God proofs have established foundations. I have heard it quoted that “Philosophy goes where hard science can 't, or won 't. Philosophers have a license to.” Therefore, with this in mind, I attest that it is more than problematic to construct an argument authenticating the unequivocal proof of the existence God. If nothing else this may be food for thought.
A cosmological argument focuses on the notion of causation and that everything in the universe including us must have an initial cause, for nothing comes from nothing. Thomas
The existence of God is a question that has troubled and plagued mankind since it began to consider logic. Is there a God? How can we be sure that God exists? Can you prove to me that He is real? Does His existence, or lack thereof, make a significant difference? These loaded questions strike at the heart of human existence. But the real question is, can we answer any of them? These questions are answered in the arguments of St. Thomas Aquinas, Blaise Pascal and St. Anselm of Canterbury. For thousands of years, theologians, philosophers and scientists have been trying to prove or disprove God’s existence. Many, including the three mentioned above, have strong proofs and theories that attempt to confirm God’s existence. Although, without any scientific evidence, how can they be entirely sure? “Philosophical proofs can be good proofs, but they do not have to be scientific proofs,” (Kreeft). Gravity similar to God’s existence ; it cannot be seen nor explained, yet it still exists. With faith, reason, understanding and even some math, God’s existence can be verified rationally.
Throughout the course of this essay we shall examine two of the major philosophical arguments for the existence of God. The arguments that we are going to focus on shall be the Design argument and the Ontological argument. We shall compare, evaluate and discuss both the Design (or teleological) argument for the existence of God and the Ontological Argument for the existence of God, as well as highlighting philosophical criticisms of both theories too. By doing so, we shall attempt to draw a satisfactory conclusion and aim gain a greater understanding of the respective theories and their criticisms of each theory.
Proof Of The Exsistence of God Either God exists or He doesn't. There is no middle ground. Any attempt to remain neutral in relation to God's existence is automatically synonymous with unbelief. The question for God's existence is really important. Does God exist? Theology, cosmological, teleological and ontological arguments are all have ways to prove the existence of God. With all of these great arguments how can one deny that there is a God. There is a God and with these reasons I will prove that.