The Cosmological Argument Flashcards
Who made the cosmological argument? (Where published, basic info for introduction)
Aquinas was a 13th century Theologist who proposed cosmological argument in first 3/5 ways in which he explained God’s existence. He wrote his ideas in “Summa Theologiae” A POSTEIORI
What is the first way? (explain everything and what/whos ideas this way is based on)
The first way is argument for the unmoved mover. Similar to Aristotle’s ideas of world being in motion.
1) Everything is in a process of motion, everything is changing and constantly moving from potential to actual states. (Give examples)
2) Things can’t be actually and potentially the same thing at the same time.
3) therefore everything in motion has been put in this state by something else. However this chain cannot go on fr infinity as then there would be “no first mover and consequentially no other mover”.
Therefore there must be a first mover which has no cause and this mover is God. (Unmoved mover- first and only cause for universe)
What is a quote to conclude Aquinas’ first way?
“It is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God”. (Aquinas, Summa Theologiae
What was Aquinas’ second way?
Uncaused causer:
Nothing is an efficient cause of itself and efficient causes follow in an order. First cause causes second etc. It is not possible for efficient causes to go back to infinity as if there is no efficient first cause there will be no following causes.
Conclusion: “necessary to admit a first efficient cause to which everyone gives the name of God”
Whats a quote from Aquinas to conclude his second way?
“necessary to admit a first efficient cause to which everyone gives the name of God” (Summa Theologiae)
What was Aquinas’ third way?
The third way is about contingency. He said everything is dependent on other factors. (otherwise they wouldnt exist) Everything is contingent. These factors demand a necessary being who depends on nothing but itself. In order to make sense of the world there has to be a necessary being, who is God. For the universe to exist there has to be a being which is necessary to the universe.
What are the characteristics of Aquinas’ ‘God’?
The being is independent from the world, it started the chain but cannot interfere.
What were Aquinas’ ideas on infinite regression?
Infinite regression is a chain of events which goes back for eternity. He thought this was impossible and explained it with potentiality and actuality, every domino is potentially the cause for the next one however the chain had to start somewhere = the first domino. He said there cant be an infinite regression of events as there has to be a ‘pure act’ (an actual act, no potential or cause) and for aquinas the pure act is God.
Why did Hume reject Aquinas’ ways 1 and 2?
- He questioned the idea of everything having a cause and effect. (example of bus) Not everything has a cause and effect, believed we have just made a psychological link between cause and effect as we see 2 things happening.
- Fallacy of composition: You cannot deduce that the universe has a cause just cos we see cause within it.
What’s Hume’s quote for the fallacy of composition?
“Obviously the human race hasn’t a mother, that’s a different logical sphere”.
What is the principle of sufficient reason?
made by Leibniz idea of explaining how a thing came to exist is sufficient reason. So a sufficient reason to explain the universe’s existence would thus explain how the universe exists.
Who was Frederick Copleston and what did he do?
20th century reformulated the third way of Aquinas’ argument. Defended the cosmological argument in debate against Bertrand Russell
What was Copleston’s reformation of the third way?
1) some things are contingent i.e they dont HAVE to exist
2) the world is the totality or sum of these contingent beings
3) there must be an explanation for the existence of these contingent beings which is outside of the universe
Conclusion: A being exists who is not contingent (God) and is the explanation for the existence of contingent things within the universe.
What were Bertrand Russel’s views/arguments?
- The Universe is a brute fact. “I should say the universe is just there and that’s all”.
- QUANITIFIER SHIFT FALLACY - Just cos things in universe have a cause doesn’t mean the universe itself has a cause. The cosmological argument is a fallacy. Everything in universe has a cause to the conclusion : “the universe itself has a cause” this conclusion is invalid conclusion does not follow from premise that everything IN the universe has a cause.
