Issues with the theories Flashcards
What is the logical issue with the cosmological argument concerning the possibility of an infinite series?
- It has been proven that it may be possible to logically conceive of an infinite series:
- Aquinas claims that the creaion of an infinite series would remove the first mover in a chain of movers, and therefore a chain wouldn’t exist at all, as there is no beginning. However, if the chain was infinite, it wouldn’t need a first mover.
What is the scientific issue with the cosmological argument stating that an infinite series is impossible?
- Lane Craig claims that the Big Bang helps prove that Go made the universe from nothing (ex nihilio)
However, developments in theories such as the Big Crunch, suggest the infinite growth and crushing of the universe, which would create an infinite series. - Multiverse belief would create infinite worlds.
What is the mathematical problem with the cosmological argument claiming that an infinite series is impossible?
Leibniz and Newton created calculus, which meant mathematicians were far more confortable with admitting that an infinite series is possible.
Georg Cantor also creates ‘Transfinite’ numbers in his set theory, which allow infinite paradoxes such as the infinite hotel problem to be solved.
What is the criticism to all of the responses to the issue of the possibility of an infinite series?
All of this is true, but what actually caused this infinite series to be created is still unnamed and undiscovered, therefore the possibility of god creating this universe is still not disproven.
However, Russell claims we do not need a reason for the universe’s creation.
What is the issue with the cosmological argument concerning Hume’s criticism of the causal principle?
Hume claims that the proposition ‘Every event has a cause’ cannot be proven or answered. As it is not a relation of ideas, or a matter of fact:
- Matter of fact: We cannot ‘observe’ causation. If two events are conjoined, it is not guaranteed that they will repeat this process, as we cannot percieve the future.
- Relation of ideas: ‘All events do not have a cause,’ according to Hume, is not a contradiction. Hume claims that the oppposite is a blik.
What is a criticism to Hume’s dismissal of the causal principle?
Is it actually really impossible to concieve of an event without a cause. This would require us to remove context altogether, which seems impossible. - Elizabeth Anscombe.
Bertrand Russell uses an example from quantum mechanics to state that it actually is possible.
What is the issue concerning the cosmological argument and the fallacy of composition?
Hume claims the cosmological argument claims that because each event has a series of causes, then the entire chain must have a cause. This is fallicious.
Russell uses the ‘humanity must have a mother’ example to solidify this belief.
Edwards gives the 5 Canadians in NYC example, and states there actually is no ‘group’ of events in reality.
What are the criticisms of the fallacy of composition criticism against the cosmological argument?
Inference in referring to a whole group is not always fallicious. E.g., the ‘constituency’ of Tumbridge Wells is Conservative. This is because the majority of members voted for the conservative party. However, this is a higher ‘group’ whereas, ‘chain of events,’ is not included.
What is the issue with the cosmological argument concerning the impossibility of a necessary being?
Hume argues: There is no contradiction if a being exists, for someone to concieve of its non-existecnce. Therefore, God does not need to exist, as he is not necessary to conceive of as existent.
Russell states it is not an analytic truth that God exists, as it is not contradictory for us to state ‘ God does not exist’
What is a response to the criticism of the cosmological argument that God is not a necessary being?
Hick draws the distinction between logical necessity and ontological necessity. Russell and Hume criticise the logical necessity of God, not the ontology of God’s existence. Therefore, they fail in disproving his necessary quality.
What does Russsell say about finding the origin of the universe?
” the universe is just there, and that’s all,” - B. Russell.
What does the cosmological argument ultimately prove?
It highlights the dilemma when looking for the necessity of God:
- Either, God exists and is necessary.
- Or, there is no explanation for the origin of the universe.
