Cosmological Argument

Question 1

Leibniz’s Principle of Sufficient Reason

Answer 1

• since everything within the world is contingent, in order to have a total explanation, or sufficient reason, we have to get back to something which is not contingent and does not depend on anything else for existence

Question 2

The Kalam Argument - Points

Answer 2

• the kalam argument argues from the existence of the universe to the existence of god,
• if something is not its own reason for existing then it must have been caused by something else

Question 3

Aquinas: Motion

Answer 3

• following Aristotle, by motion means any kind of change; something can only change if it has the potential to change

Question 4

The Second Way: Causation

Answer 4

Aquinas identifies a series of causes and effects in the universe and observes that nothing could cause itself as this would mean it would have to exist before it existed and this is logically impossible

Question 5

The Third Way: Contingency

Answer 5

Aquinas argues that the world consists of contingent beings/items that are generated and perish

Question 6

Strengths of Aquinas Cosmological Argument

Answer 6

• Inductive arguments are based on probability rather than proof and show existence of God is likely not certain
• Cosmological arguments seem to be supported by inductive scientific arguments such as Big Bang
• if movement and contingent beings was possible, we would still require an explanation

Question 7

Weaknesses of Aquinas Argument

Answer 7

• inductive arguments are only probable so do not provide the certainty of God’s existence
• the idea of infinite regress is also a problem for the argument, there could be an endless series of causes; there doesn’t need to be a prime mover
• why only one necessary being?