The Various Forms of the Cosmological Argument for the Existence of God
The cosmological argument is a well established argument for the existence of God and it is also known as the first cause argument.
The cosmological argument is based upon the belief that there is a first cause behind the existence of universe and this was God. It has taken many forms and in the past has been presented in many ways. So many philosophers have put their points across, philosophers like; Plato, Aquinas, Socrates, Hume, Kant and many more.
The first person to put their point across was Plato. He argued that the power to produce the movements plausibly comes before the power to receive it and pass it on. In
…show more content…
Both Aquinas and Craig deny the infinite and yet argue that God is infinite. Believers of the argument point out that God is unique and that the laws of nature do not apply to God.
In the five ways Anthony Kenny said that Aquinas’s principle that nothing moves itself goes against the fact that people and animals move themselves. He stated that Newton’s first law of motion, in which movement can be explained by a body’s own sluggishness from previous motion, disapproves Aquinas’s argument. It is possible for object to have uniform motion as well as to be in a state of rest.
b)
The strengths of the Cosmological Argument lie in both its simplicity and easily comprehensible concept that there cannot be an infinite number of causes to an event. Some arguments for God's existence require more thought and training in terms and concepts, but this argument is basic and simple. Also, it is perfectly logical to assert that objects do not bring themselves into existence and must, therefore, have causes.
For must not the cause of existing things exist? We find ourselves faced with the possibility of an infinite regress. If it is true of A that it is caused to exist by B, why may not B be caused to exist by C, D, E…and so on ad infinitum? If there actually is a cause of
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.
The famous William Paley has a different ontological argument within his text Natural Theology. The title of the reading gives insight to the theory, which focuses on something called natural design. The writing is based on an intricate and extensive analogy between the man made and the natural. For instance, Paley describes a man made watch in great detail. This intense detail sets the notion that each piece must have been put in place by someone, whom we can infer is a watchmaker. He then compares this to the intricacy of nature, which must have been made by a supreme diety. Such complexity could not have come about by chance. Only the most
Descartes’ ontological argument is an echo of the original ontological argument for the existence of God as proposed by St. Anselm in the 11th century. To illustrate the background of the ontological argument, Anselm’s argument works within a distinct framework of ontology that posits the existence of God as necessity by virtue of its definition. In other words, for the mind to conceive of an infinite, perfect God, ultimately implies that there must indeed be a perfect God that embodies existence, for perfection cannot merely exist as a mental phenomenon. God is, according to Anselm, self-evident in the mind. Criticisms to this argument can be found in Anselm’s contemporary, Gaunilo, who argues that such an argument can be used to - put
With this in mind, we can say that the third premise, which states that if something exists now, then something has always existed, is valid. After all, if something exists now, there must have been something to cause it or nothing would exist.
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.
it would have been impossible for anything to have begun to exist and thus even nothing would be in existence, which is absurd. Therefore we cannot but admit the existence of some being having of itself its own necessity, and not receiving it from another, but rather causing in others their necessity. This all men speak of God”. He is saying that all living creatures depend on something else for its survival.
have been as a result of a divine being, who wished it to happen, and
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
The argument rests on the grounds that the first cause must rely on nothing to exist, must be powerful enough to create something from nothing, must have the will to create and must exist outside the universe it creates. The
Does God exist? This question has been in debate for centuries with many opposing views, some arising from philosophers on the same side while others refute Gods existence altogether. However for this particular paper I will be taking the best explanations approach. What I mean by this is I do not have proof of God’s existence but the existence of God is the best explanation for the universe around me. With this statement in mind we will discuss arguments in support of God’s existence as well as philosopher H.J McCloskey’s article On Being an Atheist.
perspective of man is that he was created by a divine Creator with a specific
The Strengths and Weaknesses of the Cosmological Argument for the Existence of God The cosmological argument seeks to prove the existence of God by looking at the universe. It is an A posteriori proof based on experience and the observation of the world not logic so the outcome is probable or possible not definite. The argument is in three forms; motion, causation and being. These are also the first three ways in the five ways presented by Aquinas through which he believed the existence of God could be shown.
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 argument claims that everything that begins to exist has a
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.