Cosmological argument

Question 1

Explain the word “Cosmological”

Answer 1

Greek: Cosmos = universe; logos = the study of

An argument that tries to prove the existence of God by describing him as the cause (a necessary being)

Question 2

What types of reasoning does the cosmological argument use?

Answer 2

A posteriori - it is based on our experience of the world
A priori (Descartes trademark argument)
Inductive - the premises support but do not entail the conclusion (probabilistic)
Synthetic - the argument is not true or false by definition of its premises (it has to be tested)

Question 3

Outline the Kalam argument - an argument from temporal causation

Answer 3

First put forward by Islamic philosopher Ghazali and further developed by William Lane Craig.

P1. Everything with a beginning must have a cause
P2. The universe has a beginning
Con (1). Therefore, the universe must have a cause
Con (2). Moreover, this cause of the universe must be intended as scientific explanations cannot provide a causal, or mechanical account of a first cause.

Question 4

Name Aquinas five ways

Answer 4

First Way - the argument from motion
Second Way - the argument from (temporal) causation
Third Way - the argument from contingency
Fourth Way - the argument from degrees
Five Way - a type of teleological argument

Question 5

Outline Aquinas´ first way - argument from motion

Answer 5

1. There are some things in motion or a state of change (from potentially X to actually Y)
2. Nothing can move or change itself (everything is a secondary mover)
3. Imagine everything was a secondary mover, then there would be an infinite regress.
4. If 3 were true then there would be no prime mover and hence no subsequent movers, but this is false.
5. There must be an unmoved prime mover (the source of all motion/change)

Question 6

Outline Aquinas´ second way - argument from
atemporal causation

Answer 6

1. Some things are caused
2. Anything that is caused has to be caused by something else (nothing can be the efficient cause of itself)
3. An infinite regress of causes is impossible
4. There must have been a first causer, itself uncaused, and that is God

Question 7

Outline Aquinas´ third way - argument from contingency

Answer 7

1. There are contingent things
2. Contingent things can cause other contingent things, but there cannot only be contingent things.
3. This is because this would mean that there is an infinite regress of contingency, and a possibility that nothing might have existed.
4. An infinite regress is impossible
5. There must be at least one necessary being, and that is God

Question 8

Explain contingent being

Answer 8

Any being that could have not existed

Question 9

Explain necessary being

Answer 9

A being that has always existed, that always will exist, and that cannot not exist

Question 10

Evaluate Aquinas´ three ways

Answer 10

• The God he describes (uncaused causer/unmoved mover) is not the God theists actually belief in (a caring and benevolent God)
• Aquinas also does not prove the existence of a sentient God
• An infinite regress can be possible

Question 11

Outline Leibniz´s argument from sufficient reason - an argument from contingency

Answer 11

P1. Contingent beings require a sufficient reason for their existence for why they are this way and not otherwise
P2. This reason can not (ultimately) be any other contingent beings (this would simply add to the beings we try to explain)
P3. So, we require a reason outside the collection of contingent beings
Con. This sufficient reason is a necessary being: God

Question 12

Explain necessary beings

Answer 12

a being that exists necessarily and does not depend on anything else for its existence.

Question 13

Explain contingent beings

Answer 13

a being such that if it exists, it could have not existed. All contingent beings have a sufficient cause (external factors)

Question 14

What are criticisms of Leibniz´s argument from contingency?

Answer 14

• an infinite regress is only impossible for us to imagine because of our limited capacity and depth of our mind
• God´s existence has to have an explanation as well because there is no sufficient argument to stop at God
• Leibniz´s argument does not necessarily proves the existence of a monotheistic God but also polytheism
• Following Leibniz argument God would also be responsible for the existence of evil questioning the attributes of God

Question 15

Descartes´ argument based on his continuing existence - an argument from causation

Answer 15

“Whether I myself, who have the idea, could exist, if no such being existed. Now from what source could I have my being?”

P1. The existence of the idea of God in my mind needs explaining; the continuing existence of me as a conscious being also needs explaining

P2. I cannot be the cause of my idea of God (a perfect being) because I am imperfect. I cannot bring about my continuing existence as a conscious being because I do not have the power.

P3. Therefore the cause of me as a conscious being, and the cause of my idea of God, must lie outside of myself.

Con. The ultimate cause is the thing that caused itself, which is God.

His overall conclusion of the trademark argument is when God created Descartes he implanted the idea of God in him, in the same way that a craftsman stamps his work with a trademark.

Question 16

What are objections to Descartes´ argument from causation

Answer 16

• An infinite regress might be possible
• Objections to the causal principle used by Descartes (from Hume)
• Descartes´ argument is circular (his ideas to prove the existence of God rely on God giving him the ability to have this ideas)

Question 17

Explain Russell´s criticism of Aquinas´ third way

Answer 17

• Russel argues that Aquinas´ third way commits the fallacy of composition.
• A fallacy is a failure in reasoning which makes an argument invalid.
• The fallacy of composition is the fallacy of inferring that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of part of the whole, or of very part of the whole.