Can someone please teach me the cosmologocial argument for AQA AS?
- 0 votes
I don't know it
- 0 votes
you're asking a lot there! but I'll do a summary then you ask about the stuff you didn't understand or want me to go into more detail on?
sooooo, the cosmological argument refers to any argument for the existence of God based on evidence from the universe. There are three types of cosmological argument:
- to explain the original cause for the universe
(Aquinas 1, Aquinas 2, Kalam & Craig)
- to explain the continued existence of the universe
(Aquinas 3 & Copleston)
- a complete explanation of the universe
(McCabe & Leibniz)
Aquinas (did believe in God, but is simply trying to defend his beliefs and explain why God exists) First Way (A1) The argument from motion: "Ex Motu"
- Motu comes from the latin of metus - meaning a change of state
- So when Aquinas talks of motion, he means the change of state we see in beings (not moving from A to B)
- Building on Aristotle, Aquinas argues that everything has a potential, but needs an outside agent to change that into something actual
- E.G wood (the object) has the potential to be hot (actual), but needs heat (outside agent)
- "anything in the progress of change is being changed by something else"
- Aquinas then argued that if everything is dependent upon an outside agent to cause it to move, there are two options.
1. there is an infinite number of movers, (aka infinite regression - later rejected) or
2. there was a first mover that started everything else
- He then argues this first mover must be unmoved (else won't be the first) and the first unmoved mover was God
Strength: can be applied to other situations, makes logical sense, and we can draw evidence from anywhere
Weakness: begs the question, and takes an inductive leap
Aquinas' Second Way (A2): the first efficient cause "ex causa efficiente"
- builds on Aristotle again, agruing that for everything that exists, there are 4 causes:
- the material cause (the physical material of the object)
- the formal cause (the design)
- the final cause (the purpose)
- the efficient cause (the maker)
- simular to A1, but instead of arguing that everything has a mover before them, they have an efficient cause
- rejects an infinite series of efficient causes
- leads A to the conclusion that there must be a first uncaused causer - God
- "you can not cause yourself to exist because you would have to proceed yourself - exist before you exist"
Strength: (your opinion)
Weakness: (your opinion)
So this is a quarter of what you need to know, if this is helpful, reply and I will write more tomorrow, good luck!