The Cosmological Argument cannot prove God exists

Question 1

intro

Answer 1

Aquinas’ first three ways: motion, causation, contingency

Question 2

Paragraph 1- Way One

Answer 2

Way 1 (motion)
-observe there’s motion
-nothing moves itself only moved when moved by something else
-can’t be an infinite regress of movers
-must have been a first mover that itself was unmoved- this unmoved mover is God

Question 3

Paragraph 1- Way Two

Answer 3

-observe c + e in world
-everything in universe result of succession of causes
-nothing can cause itself
-cannot be infinite regress of causation
-must have been first cause that itself uncaused- call this God

Question 4

critique from Hume

Answer 4

Can only observe limited amount and shouldn’t make assumption c + e apply to anything outside our experience
-Sun rise tomorrow
-Inductive argument- collect data to suggest probable conclusion.
-could simply be that every event we have ever observed has a cause – but this doesn’t mean that every event, including the creation of the universe, has a cause.
-if the universe has no cause – then God can’t be argued for as the required explanation of the causation (or motion) of the universe.

Question 5

Paragraph 2- critique of cause

Answer 5

-causal principle is an empirical (scientific) hypothesis which has so far been justified by all the evidence we have ever observed.
-maybe can’t prove the causal principle for absolutely certain as a matter of logic – but so far all the evidence supports it (every time we observe an event, it has a cause) so, arguably we are justified in accepting it.
-fact that every event we observe in the universe has a cause is not even evidence for the universe having a cause
-empirical evidence of c+e within the universe does not make it reasonable to believe the causal principle

Question 6

Paragraph 3- contingent beings

Answer 6

-cannot be infinite regress of contingent beings
-if everything in universe forms chain of contingent beings then before there would have been nothing
-something can’t come from nothing
-must be necessary being which began series of contingent ones
-this being is God

Question 7

critique from Hume against contingency

Answer 7

-idea of a necessary being is absurd and meaningless – because there is no being which we are unable to imagine not existing. Possible to imagine god not existing so possible for him not to exist

Question 8

response to Hume: PofSR

Answer 8

-Universe needs reason why it exists. Copies of book, which copied from previous, etc. even when arrive at first book no reason why it was written. Should ask why there’s something instead of nothing.
-Copleston uses this- contingent beings need reason outside themselves to exist. Full and sufficient reason provided by God, necessary being, doesn’t need further explanation or reason.

Question 9

Russells response to PofSR

Answer 9

-why does there have to be a cause behind everything?
-mother example doesn’t mean mother for the entire human race
-universe may have reached point in existence bc of series of causes but doesn’t mean has to be one great cause behind it all.