cosmological argument

Question 1

The argument

Answer 1

posteriori and inductive argument for the existence of God.
One example was proposed by st Aquinas in the 11th century and written in his text, summa theologica, it is based around five arguments that seek to prove the existence of God by highlighting the contingency of the universe and seeking a creator. In his argument only God is the possible creator of the universe.

Question 2

Aquinas first way : motion

Answer 2

• nothing can be potential and actual at the same time
  -whatever is moved (changed) must be moved (changed) by another
• infinite regress is impossible since there would be no first mover (changer)
• there must be a first mover, moved by no other and this we understand to be God.

Question 3

Aquinas’ second way

Answer 3

• nothing could be the efficient cause of itself since it would already have had to exist to bring itself into existence.
• infinite regress is impossible since there would be no first cause
• there must be a first cause, caused by no other and this we understand to be God.

Question 4

Aquinas’ third way

Answer 4

-P1: everything in the world is contingent ( it can either exist or not)
-P2: if things exist, there must be some time when they didn’t exist
-c (mini): there must have been a time when NOTHING existed
-P3: things exist now
-P4: there must be something that everything depends on for it’s existence-something that ensured everything else exists but is itself necessary (not contingent)
-C(main) : the necessary being is God.

Question 5

Critiques

Answer 5

HUME: has three main critiques
1. FALLACY OF COMPOSITION: Russell says aquinas made a mistake in the structure of the argument. Just because every event in a series has a cause doesn’t mean the series itself has a cause. He gives the example of a collection of twenty particles.
He also supported this critique by claiming that just because every man has a mother doesn’t mean that there is a mother of the human race.
2. NECESSARY BEINGS: Hume rejects Aquinas’ third way ( the existence of a necessary being) His critique can be laid out as:
- any being that exists can also not exist
- there is no contradiction in thinking that any being does not exist
- This is true of God also, because there is no contradiction in saying, ‘God does not exist.’

so when his way 3 requires God to be a necessary being, this is false logic. contradictions only occur when we deny truths like an analytic statement (use triangle example)
However, the denial of God’s existence is not an impossibility or a contradiction as Hume stated “ all existential propositions are synthetic”

3.INFINITE REGRESSION AS A POSSIBILITY: Hume questions why motion needs to have a starting point- in other words why does infinite regress seem impossible. Surely if there can be an understanding of a prime mover there can be an understanding of perpetual motion?

Question 6

RESPONSES/STRENGTHS