The Cosmological Argument
The cosmological argument in all its glory.
- Created by: Kieran Cutting
- Created on: 11-05-13 22:40
View mindmap
- The Cosmological Argument
- What is it?
- An argument concerned with the existence of the universe
- The universe cannot account for its own existence
- There must be a reason the universe exists
- Infinite regress seems unlikely
- There must be a reason the universe exists
- The universe cannot account for its own existence
- An argument concerned with the existence of the universe
- Aquinas
- The Five Ways
- The First Way - The Unmoved Mover
- Things stay the same unless put into motion by something else
- This chain cannot be infinite
- There must be an unmoved mover
- The Second Way - The Uncaused Causer
- Every effect has a cause
- Things do not cause themselves
- There must be a first cause which is itself uncaused
- It is contradictory to say that anything is uncaused
- This assumes God is a 'thing' like any other
- St. Anselm - "God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived"
- This assumes God is a 'thing' like any other
- It is contradictory to say that anything is uncaused
- If one thing changes another, it must have that quality
- "it is not dead men who commit murders" - Anthony Kenny
- The thing must have the potential for that quality
- "it is not dead men who commit murders" - Anthony Kenny
- The Third Way - Necessity and Contingency
- The universe is full of contingent things
- Initially
- Continued
- Things are contingent but this does not mean that the universe is contingent
- If all are contingent there must be a non-contingent start point
- The universe is full of contingent things
- Assumptions
- The universe exists
- There must be a reason for the universe's existence
- Infinite regress could be true
- The First Way - The Unmoved Mover
- The Five Ways
- Leibiniz
- Sufficient reason and complete explanation
- Even if one believes we have always been here, we must have sufficient reason for existence
- Leibiniz never answers his own question! Silly Leibiniz.
- Even if one believes we have always been here, we must have sufficient reason for existence
- Sufficient reason and complete explanation
- Copleston
- Supports Aquinas' rejection of infinite regress
- "An infinite chain of contingent beings could only ever consist of contingent beings"
- This chain could not bring itself into existence
- "An infinite chain of contingent beings could only ever consist of contingent beings"
- Copleston's cosmological argument
- Some things exist which do not contain a reason for existence within themselves
- The world contains a totality of such objects
- The explanation for all things must lie outside of the thing
- This explanation must be self-explanatory
- "necessary being"
- Russell
- Necessity is only applicable in statements of logic
- Not possible in terms of the universe
- "necessary being"
- The universe is brute fact
- Quantum mechanics
- Particles can come in and out of existence without a cause
- Why can't the universe be the same?
- Particles can come in and out of existence without a cause
- Quantum mechanics
- We may look for explanations but should not assume one will be found
- If it is reasonable to seek explanation of the universe, why is it not reasonable to seek explanation of God?
- Necessity is only applicable in statements of logic
- Supports Aquinas' rejection of infinite regress
- Swinburne
- "the most likely state of affairs is nothing"
- Ockham's razor
- "God is simpler an explanation than anything we can imagine and gives a simple explanation for the system"
- Points towards designer God, even if we cannot explain his existence
- Ockham's razor
- "the most likely state of affairs is nothing"
- Plato
- There must be a mover that requires no further mover
- Must be a soul of a higher order
- There must be a mover that requires no further mover
- Aristotle
- Plato's mover must be beyond the universe
- Activates the world with its presence
- Encourages all things towards the ultimate good
- Non-spatial
- Eternal
- Perfect
- Activates the world with its presence
- Plato's mover must be beyond the universe
- The Kalam Argument
- Classical
- Al-Kindi, Al-Ghazali
- Everything which comes into existence has a cause
- Al-Kindi, Al-Ghazali
- Modern
- William Lane Craig
- Rejection of infinite regress
- An actual infinite cannot exist
- An infinite temporal regress is an example of an actual infinite
- An infinite temporal regress cannot exist.
- Rejection of infinite regress
- William Lane Craig
- Classical
- The Big Bang
- Rejects infinite regress - hypothesises a finite timeline
- Strengths
- a posteriori
- Uses universally available evidence
- It gives a solution to the universe's existence and all must be taken into account
- "questions about the universe cannot be separated from questions abut God" - Herbert McCabe
- a posteriori
- Weaknesses
- Quantum mechanics
- Particles can come in and out of existence without a cause
- Why can't the universe be the same?
- Particles can come in and out of existence without a cause
- "the cosmological argument is intellectually degrading" - Dawkins
- If there is no scientific conclusion, there should be further investigation
- Why can there not be multiple movers?
- If all things are contingent then how can there be any non-contingent things?
- To conclude God is the mover requires an inductive leap of logic
- Quantum mechanics
- Hume
- Why presume the need for a cause?
- If individual parts can be explained, why do we need a cayse for the whole chain?
- Why look for an explanation of the whole?
- Looking for one is like looking for a mother of all humanity
- Humans have sufficient explanation; the universe does not
- Sufficient reason and complete explanation
- Even if one believes we have always been here, we must have sufficient reason for existence
- Leibiniz never answers his own question! Silly Leibiniz.
- Even if one believes we have always been here, we must have sufficient reason for existence
- Copleston
- Supports Aquinas' rejection of infinite regress
- "An infinite chain of contingent beings could only ever consist of contingent beings"
- This chain could not bring itself into existence
- "An infinite chain of contingent beings could only ever consist of contingent beings"
- Copleston's cosmological argument
- Some things exist which do not contain a reason for existence within themselves
- The world contains a totality of such objects
- The explanation for all things must lie outside of the thing
- This explanation must be self-explanatory
- Russell
- Necessity is only applicable in statements of logic
- Not possible in terms of the universe
- The universe is brute fact
- We may look for explanations but should not assume one will be found
- If it is reasonable to seek explanation of the universe, why is it not reasonable to seek explanation of God?
- Necessity is only applicable in statements of logic
- Supports Aquinas' rejection of infinite regress
- Sufficient reason and complete explanation
- Humans have sufficient explanation; the universe does not
- Robert Gardener-Sharpe's cake anaology
- Individual parts of the universe come and go, it is the whole which is constant
- Looking for one is like looking for a mother of all humanity
- Is the concept of a necessary being meaningful?
- We can understand the destruction of any being
- The cosmological argument starts with familiar concepts but reaches conclusions beyond human experience
- We can understand the destruction of any being
- Why presume the need for a cause?
- What is it?
Comments
No comments have yet been made