arguments based on observation - cosmological

Question 1

is the cosmological argument a priori or a posteriori

Answer 1

a posteriori

Question 2

why is it aposteriori

Answer 2

because it uses empiricism (knowledge gained from sense experience) to gain knowledge about the existence of God from examining the cosmos - using senses

Question 3

what was aquinas book called

Answer 3

summa theologica

Question 4

which ways are aquinas’ cosmological argument

Answer 4

the first three

Question 5

what is aquinas’ first way

Answer 5

the unmoved mover

Question 6

explain the unmoved mover

Answer 6

everything in the universe moves. a thing cannot move itself, therefore it must be moved by something else. there cannot be an infinite regress. there must be a first mover - this is God

Question 7

what does aquinas mean by unmoved mover

Answer 7

that god moves all things in the universe but is not moved himself

Question 8

why is it important that God is unmoved

Answer 8

if god moved then what would be moving God - would lead to infinite regress
if god moved it would mean he is changing and therefore not perfect
god is not part of the movement process he is the causer

Question 9

aquinas second way

Answer 9

uncaused causer

Question 10

explain uncaused causer

Answer 10

everything in the world has a cause and effect. a thing cannot cause itself. therefore it must be caused by something else. we cannot have an infinite regress. there must be an uncaused cause - God

Question 11

uncaused cause quote

Answer 11

“if you eliminate cause you also eliminate its effects, so you cannot have a last cause nor an intermediate one, unless you have a first”

Question 12

what does uncaused causer mean

Answer 12

god causes cause and effect but is not caused himself

Question 13

why is it important that god is uncaused

Answer 13

if god was caused that means something caused god and would lead to infinite regress
god is not part of cause and effect chain

Question 14

aquinas third way

Answer 14

contingency and necessity

Question 15

explain contingency and necessity as aquinas third way

Answer 15

everything is contingent - all things come into existence and out of existence
at some point there was nothing
nothing comes from nothing
if there was nothing, there would be nothing now
there must have been something then
so something exists which is necessary
we call this god

Question 16

david humes criticisms (2)

Answer 16

fallacy of composition
cause and effect

Question 17

fallacy of composition

Answer 17

just because everything in the universe has a cause, does not mean the universe as a whole has a cause- this is a leap of logic
fallacy = mistaken belief

Question 18

humes example in the fallacy of composition

Answer 18

twenty particles:
if you find an explanation for each particle individually it would be wrong to then seek an explanation for the whole collection

Question 19

russels support of hume - example for fallacy of compositon

Answer 19

every man has a mother is not proof that humanity has a mother

Question 20

humes second criticism

Answer 20

we assume there is a relationship between cause and effect. we are in habit of seeing effects and associating with causes. not all effects have causes
we have not experienced the creation of the universe. we cannot prove empirically that there is a necessary being or that the being is God.

Question 21

arguments criticising god as creator

Answer 21

analytic and synthetic statements

Question 22

analytic statements

Answer 22

statements of reason - logic within them

Question 23

example of analytic statement

Answer 23

all bachelors are unmarried men

Question 24

synthetic statements

Answer 24

need proof

Question 25

example of synthetic statements

Answer 25

it is raining

Question 26

russel using analytic and synthetic statements against the cosmological argument

Answer 26

only analytic statements are ‘necessary’
you cannot have a necessary being i.e God
a ‘being’ or ‘God’ is to use a name - statements about god are synthetic - need proof of existence
cannot prove god is necessary being - so the statement is meaningless

Question 27

other criticisms

Answer 27

why cant the universe exist without the need for explanation? like god can
cause and effect stretch infinitely into the future, so why cant it stretch infinitely into the past? so no need for first cause
Pie number is infinite - stretch into the future forever

Question 28

other explanations for start of the universe

Answer 28

the big bang