Pages in this set

Page 1

Preview of page 1
The cosmological argument is an a posteriori argument that attempts to prove the
existence of God by inferring the cosmos requires a creator. The classic
comosmolgical argument goes as follows:

Things come into exisitence because something has caused them to
These things are caused to exisit…

Page 2

Preview of page 2
1. We cannot know anything about the cause of the universe. Experience is the foundation of all our
knowledge. Through habit we make associations of cause and effect. We have no direct experience
of the cause of the universe. Our ideas of a necessary being go beyond all possible experience.…

Page 3

Preview of page 3
This argument lays out two types of infinite; potential infinite and actual infinite.
Potential infinite: exists if it is always possible to add more to a series of things or
events ­ it is possible to think of the future as a potential infinite. However, it is
never actual infinity.…

Page 4

Preview of page 4
1. It could be argued that there is no need to have an agent making a choice between having a
universe and not having one. The universe would have just begun at a random point without a
conscious choice being made.
2. The Kalam argument is self-contradicting when it says…

Page 5

Preview of page 5
`guess work' but it was very educated guess work and much of it made sense to many scientists, but
not all.
This can be explained with the example of a small cup of treacle. The cup is broken and the treacle
expands; everything becomes less dense. The decrease of density…




One obvious mistake when glancing though this: it was PENZIAS AND WILSON who detected afterglow of Big Bang not Denzias

Similar Philosophy resources:

See all Philosophy resources »