the cosmological argument (arguments from observation) - Aquinas Flashcards

1
Q

what is the cosmological argument?

A

the cosmological argument uses rational, scientific evidence to prove God’s existence, based on the cosmos

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

what type of argument is the cosmological argument?

A

inductive argument

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

what is Aquinas’ first way?

A

ARGUMENT FROM MOTION:

premise 1: things in the world move from potentiality to actuality

premise 2: things themselves cannot move from potentiality to actuality

conclusion 1: therefore, things are caused to move from potentiality to actuality by other things

premise 4: we cannot have an infinite regress of causes

conclusion 2: there must be a First Mover

conclusion 3: the First Mover is God

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

how does Gottfried Leibniz support the argument from motion?

A

PRINCIPLE OF SUFFICIENT REASONING:
- if something exists, there must be a reason why it exists

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

what is Aquinas’ second way?

A

ARGUMENT FROM CAUSATION:
premise 1: everything in the world has a sufficient cause

premise 2: nothing can be its own efficient cause

premise 3: we cannot have an infinite regress of efficient causes

conclusion 1: there must be a first efficient cause

conclusion 2: that cause is God

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

what is Aquinas’ third way?

A

ARGUMENT FROM CONTINGENCY:

premise 1: everything in the natural world is contingent

premise 2: if everything in the natural world is contingent, then at some time there was nothing

premise 3: nothing can come from nothing

conclusion 1: therefore, there is at least one thing that exists necessarily

conclusion 2: the most natural way to understand this being is as God

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

what is a weakness of the cosmological argument?

A

HUME:
1. Fallacy of the affirmation of the consequent - there is no clear reason why the first mover, the first efficient cause or necessary being must be God

  1. Fallacy of composition - just because each individual parts have similar properties, doesn’t mean they share those properties as a whole
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

what is an overcoming of Hume’s weakness?

A

SWINBURNE:
- God is the best explanation
- all things have either a personal or scientific explanation
- God must be a personal explanation, as if we were to provide a scientific explanation for the existence of the universe there would need to be a scientific law

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly