Advantages and Disadvantages of The Cosmological Argument

An Outline in The Strengths and Weknesses of The Cosmological Argument, including philosophical arguments.

Advantages and Disadvantages of The Cosmological Argument

Advantages

  • A Posteriori - Therefore grounded in our experience
  • Better than no explanation (Sufficient Reason, as presented by Leibniz)
  • Supported and made stronger by The Design Argument (Davies)
  • Follows philosophically sound logic (inductive logic)
  • The world isn't an intelligent being, but God is, so if God's omnipotent he could be infinite
  • Science haas proven the world has a beginning, and supports scientific discovery therefore can be combined with other theories e.g. The Big Bang Theory (Heisenburg)
  • An example of of natural theology complimenting revealed theology (As found in Genesis, for example)
  • Provides evidence that confirms the characteristics of the God of classical theism
  • Describes God in Anthropomorphic Terms (Otto)
  • Infinity is an unproved idea (Copleston)
  • The Analogy of the infinite number of train carriages; An infinite number of these still requires an engine to inject energy (Makie)
  • Rejection of 'The World doesn't need a cause' - "To ignore the question on how the world arose is to reject a question fundamental to human existence" (Copleston)
  • Ockham's Razor - Why multiply the cause when one would suffice

Disadvantages

  • No proof of God's existence
  • Lots of Inductive Leaps (Hume)
  • No imperial evidence (Hume)
  • Assumptions between cause and effect
  • The world may be infinite and doesn't need to have a cause (Russell and Oscillating Universe Theory)
  • Contradicting statements - Everything needs a cause, but God doesn't need a cause
  • Notion of a necessary being is a logical impossibility
  • If we assign 'necessity' as a characteristic to God, we are no longer presenting a posteriori
  • Cosmological Argument depends on belief rather than the demonstration that Infinite Regress is impossible
  • Quantum physics shows that something can come from nothing
  • If the cosmological argument is correct then this statement also follows the same logic; All men have a mother, therefore the whole of man kind have one overall mother
  • What's the sufficient reason/explanation for God?
  • The Big Bang offers an alternative explanation

Evaluation

There are 2 possible conclusions for this argument1) Although The Cosmological Argument offers an argument based on our experiences (therefore a posteriori), the philosophers involved in its presentation make far too many Inductive Leaps and contradictions to their own theory it shows that this argument is in fact irrelevant due to the scientific evidence presented against its argument. Therefore the arguments against this theory outweigh the advantages of this argument.2) The Cosmological Argument presents many arguments which are much stronger than those presented against the argument. It uses Inductive logic and arguments which can be backed up with Ancient Theological Texts. The argument is also more satisfying than the one that Russell presents and provides much better sufficient reason. Finally it also is very quick to come back with answers to the oppositions concerns with the argument, and for this reason is stronger than the arguments against.You can choose either conclusion, it just depends on your point of view

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Religious Studies resources:

See all Religious Studies resources »See all Philosophy resources »

Advantages and Disadvantages of The Cosmological Argument

An Outline in The Strengths and Weknesses of The Cosmological Argument, including philosophical arguments.

Advantages and Disadvantages of The Cosmological Argument

Advantages

  • A Posteriori - Therefore grounded in our experience
  • Better than no explanation (Sufficient Reason, as presented by Leibniz)
  • Supported and made stronger by The Design Argument (Davies)
  • Follows philosophically sound logic (inductive logic)
  • The world isn't an intelligent being, but God is, so if God's omnipotent he could be infinite
  • Science haas proven the world has a beginning, and supports scientific discovery therefore can be combined with other theories e.g. The Big Bang Theory (Heisenburg)
  • An example of of natural theology complimenting revealed theology (As found in Genesis, for example)
  • Provides evidence that confirms the characteristics of the God of classical theism
  • Describes God in Anthropomorphic Terms (Otto)
  • Infinity is an unproved idea (Copleston)
  • The Analogy of the infinite number of train carriages; An infinite number of these still requires an engine to inject energy (Makie)
  • Rejection of 'The World doesn't need a cause' - "To ignore the question on how the world arose is to reject a question fundamental to human existence" (Copleston)
  • Ockham's Razor - Why multiply the cause when one would suffice

Disadvantages

  • No proof of God's existence
  • Lots of Inductive Leaps (Hume)
  • No imperial evidence (Hume)
  • Assumptions between cause and effect
  • The world may be infinite and doesn't need to have a cause (Russell and Oscillating Universe Theory)
  • Contradicting statements - Everything needs a cause, but God doesn't need a cause
  • Notion of a necessary being is a logical impossibility
  • If we assign 'necessity' as a characteristic to God, we are no longer presenting a posteriori
  • Cosmological Argument depends on belief rather than the demonstration that Infinite Regress is impossible
  • Quantum physics shows that something can come from nothing
  • If the cosmological argument is correct then this statement also follows the same logic; All men have a mother, therefore the whole of man kind have one overall mother
  • What's the sufficient reason/explanation for God?
  • The Big Bang offers an alternative explanation

Evaluation

There are 2 possible conclusions for this argument1) Although The Cosmological Argument offers an argument based on our experiences (therefore a posteriori), the philosophers involved in its presentation make far too many Inductive Leaps and contradictions to their own theory it shows that this argument is in fact irrelevant due to the scientific evidence presented against its argument. Therefore the arguments against this theory outweigh the advantages of this argument.2) The Cosmological Argument presents many arguments which are much stronger than those presented against the argument. It uses Inductive logic and arguments which can be backed up with Ancient Theological Texts. The argument is also more satisfying than the one that Russell presents and provides much better sufficient reason. Finally it also is very quick to come back with answers to the oppositions concerns with the argument, and for this reason is stronger than the arguments against.You can choose either conclusion, it just depends on your point of view

Comments

No comments have yet been made