CA Flashcards
Explain the Kalam argument
This is an a posteriori temporal argument for causation.
Everything that begins to exist must have a cause for its beginning. The universe began to exist, and so therefore the universe must have a cause for beginning. The cause must be: uncaused, outside of space and time, and hugely powerful. Therefore, God exists as the cause of the universe beginning.
Explain Aquainas’ first way
This is an a posteriori argument for causation.
Everything in the universe has motion( change from potentially to actually). An example of this is a pot of water. It has the potential to be hot, but requires a heat source to become hot. Nothing can change itself, because it would need to be both potential and actual, which is impossible. It must be changed by something distinct to it. If there were an infinite amount of changes caused by changes, there would be no original changer. If there were no original changer, then the motion cannot be passed on as it has no origin. Therefore, given that there are changes, there must be a first changer, and therefore god is this changer and therefore god exists.
Explain aquinas second way
This is an a posteriori atemporal argument for causation.
The universe contains sustaining causation which can be ordered. Nothing can be the sustaining cause of itself, so must be sustained by something else. If there were an infinite number of sustaining causes, there would be no original sustaining cause. If there were no first sustaining cause, then there would be no other sustaining causes. Therefore, given that there are sustaining causes, then god must be the original sustaining cause, and therefore god exists.
explain aquinas third way
This is an a posteriori argument for contingency.
If everything is contingent, then there would be a time where nothing existed. If this were so, then nothing would exist now, as nothing can come from nothing. But things do exist. Therefore there are some things that are not contingent, that must be necessary. An infinite regression of necessary beings caused by other necessary beings is impossible. Therefore there must be a necessary being that isnt caused by another, and people call this god.
explain descartes argument for the existence of god based on his continuing existence
This is an a posteriori atemporal argument for contingency
i exist from one moment to the next and this requires a cause. The only reasons for this are me, god, and another finite being. I cannot be the cause as i do not have the power to do so. No finite being could as they do not keep me existing from moment to moment, and finite beings like my parents only brought me into the world. My continuous existence cannot be the result of non divine beings, so therefore the only reason for my continued existence is a supremely perfect being, and this is god.
explain leibniz contingency argument
This is an a priori argument for causation.
All contingent things need a sufficient reason for existing. If they exist as they do because of other contingent reasons, then this is not a sufficient reason as the infinite series is contingent. Therefore there must be a sufficient reason for the contingent series. Therefore a necessary substance exists, and this is god.
what does contingency mean?
beings may exist or may not exist. They require a cause
