Cosmological argument Criticism

Question 1

Russell argued that Aquinas was guilty of the fallacy of composition

Answer 1

a) What is true of the part is not necessarily true of the whole.

b) Just because what we see in the world is caused, does not mean that the universe itself has a cause.

Question 2

Hume and Russell rejected the concept of unnecessary being.

Answer 2

a) Statements about existence are synthetic rather than analytic.

b) There is no contradiction in stating that God does not exist.

Question 3

Russell quote

Answer 3

” should say that the universe is just there, and that is all’ (Russell)

Question 4

Hume suggested that the universe might be a necessarily- existent being

Answer 4

This logic follows Occam’s razor: the conclusion is most likely if it requires fewer assumptions. The universe could be necessarily existent.

Question 5

Russell claims that the existence of the universe is simply unexplainable, it is just a brute fact

Hume argued for the possibility of infinite regress:

Answer 5

It can reasonably be asked what caused God. He argued that nothing can be said about the nature of God as the necessarily- existent being.

Question 6

Ockham quote

Answer 6

‘plurality should not be posited without necessity.’
(Ockham)

Question 7

If everything has a cause, then what caused God?

Answer 7

The Cosmological Argument is based on the observation that everything must have a cause. But Aquinas then argues that there is something without a cause - God.

•Even if infinite regression is not possible, there is no evidence that the Christian monotheistic God is the necessarily existent First Cause.

Furthermore, Hume argues that the words ‘necessarily existence have no meaning’.

He argues 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.

Question 8

Mackie: The Five Ways do not work

Answer 8

According to Mackie, none of the Five Ways work: they either depend on some untenable medieval physical principle, or just fail to establish the conclusion

For example, why do we identify the first cause as God?