Cosmological Argument AO2 and Essay Plans

Question 1

The cosmological argument is coherent

Answer 1

• it is built on empirical knowledge/on observations of the world (supported by Aristotle)
  -The argument provides a solution to one of the deepest existential questions. This counters Russell’s unwillingness to attempt to find an answer to this as Copleston argues: “If one refuses to sit down at the chess board and make a move, one cannot of course be checkmated.”
  -Leibniz- the universe requires a sufficient reason for it’s existence.
  Copleston- “there needs to be a necessary being to explain why everything else exists. Contingent beings lack the sufficient reason to explain why they exist’
  -Kalam argument- the argument of cause and effect is not exclusive to Christian philosophers. Also present in Islam
  -Aristotle, the universe requires a first cause
  -Infinite regression is illogical and goes against scientific empirical evidence

Question 2

The cosmological argument is not coherent

Answer 2

• The possibility of an infinite regress- Aquinas rejects this but with little justification.
• Bertrand Russell- the earth is a ‘brute fact’ with no need for explanation in terms of a cause.
• The inductive leap- Aquinas moves from inferring that there must be a first cause to the idea that this is the God of classical theism - on what basis for justification?
• Contradiction- Aquinas argues that, for example, everything that is in motion must possess a prior cause- and then this contradicts this by arguing for the uniqueness of God- on what basis?
• The idea of a neccesary being is unverifiable and beyond what we know (AJ Ayer)
• Leibniz’s argument falls prey to it’s own logic: If God is the sufficient reason to explain the universe, what is the sufficient explanation for God?
• The Big Bang as an alternative explanation- did the universe come about as a result of the clashing of sub-atomic matter? If so the idea of a creator God becomes less relevant!

Question 3

Arguments supporting Aquinas’ 1st/2nd/3rd Ways

Answer 3

• cosmological argument built on empirical knowledge/on observations of the world (supported by Aristotle)
• The argument provides a solution to one of the deepesnt existental questions. “If one refuses to sit down at the chess board and make a move, one cannot of course be checkmated”
• Leibniz- the universe requires a sufficient reason for it’s existence.
• Coplestion- Contingent beings lack the sufficient reason to explain why they exist.
• Brian Davies- it is logical to propose that the universe requires a cause: ‘As an argument for a first cause for all existing things the CA seems a reasonable one;
• Kalam argument- the argument of cause and effect is not exclusive to Christian philosophers. Also present in Islam
• Aristotle- the universe requires a first cause
• Infinite regression is illogical and goes against scientific empirical evidence

Question 4

Criticisms of Aquinas’ 1st and 2nd way

Answer 4

• they possibility of an infinite regress - Aquinas reject this but with little justification
• Bertrand Russell- the earth a ‘brute fact’ with no need of explanation in terms of a cause.
• The inductive leap-Aquinas moves from inferring that there must be a first cause to the idea that this is the God of classical theism- on what basis or justification? what is there to suggest that it was not a deity or greek Gods?
• Plurality of causes- perhaps there is a cause of the world, but perhaps this cause might be many causes/an imperfect cause etc.
• Contradiction- Aquinas argues that, for example, everything that is in motion must possess a prior cause- and then contradicts this by arguing for the uniqueness of God- on what basis?

Question 5

Criticisms of the 3rd Way

Answer 5

-The notion of a neccesary, unique being, is a logical impossiblity, at least from our experience
-If we assign neccesity as a characteristic to God, we are no longer presenting an a posteriori argument, or one that follows valid logic.
The idea of a necessary being is unverifiable and beyond what we know, AJ Ayer, Verification Principle.

Question 6

The universe requires an explanation

Answer 6

• JL Mackie on infinite regress: Mackie provides the analogy of the infinite number of train carriages. An infinite number of these still requires an engine to inject energy.
• Reply to Russell on the world as a brute fact: to ignore the question of how the world arose is to reject a question fundamental to human existence.
• Objection to quantumn physics- William Lane Craig argues that electrons do not pass in and out of existence without a cause but are caused by vacuum fluctuations
• Objection to the concept of infinity: infinity is an unproven concept- the library with an infinite number of red and green books
• Leibniz- the universe requires a sufficient reason for it’s existence.
• Aristotle- the universe requires a first cause.

Question 7

The universe does not require an explanation

Answer 7

• Bertrand Russell- following the logic of the cosmological argument, one might come to the conclusion that becuase all men have a mother, there must be a mother of all men. This is illogical
• David Hume: one can account for single instances of cause and effect, but to ascribe an overall cause to the universe is to go beyond the available evidence.
• The Big bang is an alternative explanation- did the universe come about as a result of the clashing of sub-atomic particles? if so the idea of a creator God becomes less relevant!

Question 8

Strengths of the 2nd way (‘the universe requires a first cause’)

Answer 8

• JL Mackie on infinite regress: Mackie provides the analogy of the infinite number of carriages. An infinite number of these still requires an engine to inject energy.
• Reply to Russell on the world as a brute fact: to ignore the question of how the world arose is to reject a question which is fundamental to human existence
• Objection to quantum physics:William Lane Craig argues that electrons do not pass in and out of existence without a cause but are influenced by vacuum fluctuations.
• Objection to the concept of infinity: infinity is an unproven concept- the library with an infinite number of red and green books.
• Leibniz- the universe requiers sufficient reason for it’s existence.
• Aristotle- the universe requires a first cause
• Copleston ‘Contingent beings lack the sufficient reason to explain why they exist’
• The universe requires a first cause.

Question 9

Criticisms of the 2nd Way (‘the universe does not require a First Cause’)

Answer 9

• The possibility of an infinite regress- Aquinas rejected this but with little justification.
• Bertrand Russell- The earth is just a brute fact with no need of explanation in terms of a cause.
• Bertrand Russell supports this: following the logic of the cosmological argument, one might come to the conclusion that because all men have a mother, there must be a mother to all men. This is illogical.
• The Big Bang as an alternative explanation- did the universe come about as a result of the the clashing of sub-atomic matter? If so the idea of a creator God becomes less relevant!