cosmological argument Flashcards
who was Thomas Aquinas?
a thirteenth century Italian monk and roman catholic priest
what was Thomas Aquinas’ body of work called?
‘Suma Theologian’ containing the 5 proofs, 3 of which made up the Cosmological argument.
a priori or a posterior?
He began in the natural world of the senses and reasoned from it, making this an a posteriori argument.
Aquinas rejected Anselm’s…..
a priori approach, and following Aristotle’s philosophy, argued the importance of empirical evidence in reaching knowledge. Hence, in order for us to know God, it is right that we should seek for empirical evidence and proceed from the analysis of certain effects to a certain cause.
1st proof: motion
We observe that things in the world are in a state of motion from a Potential state to an Actual state.
The same thing can never be both potential and actual.
As an example a thing that is HOT (actual) could become COLD (potential).
So, everything that is in a state of motion must be put into this state by another thing but this chain of movers cannot go on into infinity (no infinite regression) because then there would be no first mover, and, consequently no other mover.
Conclusion: it is necessary to arrive at a an ‘un-moved first mover’, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God.
2nd proof: cause
Nothing is an efficient Cause of itself.
Efficient causes follow in order: first cause causes a second, a second a third etc
It is not possible for efficient causes to go back to infinity (no infinite regression of causes) – Domino Analogy
If there is no efficient ‘FIRST CAUSE’ then there will not be any following causes
Conclusion: it is necessary to admit a first efficient cause to which everyone gives the name of God.
God is his own efficient cause
3rd proof: contingency
Everything in the world is contingent
Things which exist in nature have not always existed in the past and will not exist in the future (Contingent existence)
Everything Depends on something else contingent for its existence (evolution)
There cannot be an infinite regression of contingent existence
If everything at one time did not exist there would have been nothing in existence
There would be nothing in existence, because there would be nothing to bring anything into existence.
Interim Conclusion: There must exist something the existence of which is necessary (not dependant on anything for existence/has to exist)
Conclusion: There exists some being having of itself its own necessity…causing in others their necessity. This all men speak of as God.
who was David Hume?
an eighteenth century (enlightenment period) Scottish philosophy. atheist.
Hume’s first criticism: Hume challenges the idea that…
just because one ‘effect’ in a chain has a ‘cause’ it does not follow that a whole series of cause and effect has a single cause. This is sometimes referred to as the fallacy of composition.
Hume’s second criticism: Why can’t the universe be….
eternal? Can’t there be an infinite chain of cause and effect? Hume questions the assumption that an infinite series of causes and effects requires some explanation or cause for its existence.
Hume’s third criticism: Like causes resemble like….
effects. The most that can be derived from finite effects will be finite causes. All that it is reasonable to do is to propose a cause adequate to explain the effect, and this will be a finite cause.
Hume’s fourth criticism: Hume challenges….
notion (2) (that no cause can produce or give rise to perfections or excellences that it does not itself possess) by stating “any thing may produce any thing”
Hume’s fifth criticism: Hume’s argument is that there is no being….
whose non-existence implies a contradiction. By this he means the term ‘necessary being’ does not make sense a posteriori. The words ‘necessary being’ have no consistent meaning. Any being claimed to exist may or may not exist. Hume stated this by saying that ‘All existential propositions are synthetic’.
Hume’s sixth criticism: Hume states that it is a mistake to conceive….
of the cosmological question of the universe’s origin in terms of cause and effect because this takes us beyond the scope of human ideas and understanding.
Hume’s seventh criticism: There is no evidence of the link between…..
cause and effect. Causation is simply perceived and so is only a psychological link which humans make. It is a mistake to make links between a cause and an effect as they are beyond our experience.
