The Cosmological Argument Exam Questions

?
  • Created by: Elena.S
  • Created on: 23-04-17 16:47

Aquinas' Five Ways (5) (1-3)

1) proving God from motion
P1 - things in the world are moving
P2 - things cannot move themselves
C - there is an unmoved mover who causes motion in all things (God)

2) proving God from cause
P1 - every effect (event) has a cause
P2 - the universe is an event
C - there is an uncaused cause that started everything (God)

3) proving God from contingency/necessity
P1 - everything that exists is contingent and can stop existing
P2 - if everything is contingent, there must have been a time where nothing existed
P3 - something cannot come from nothing
C - there must be a necessary being that always existed upon which contingent beings are dependent upon (God)

1 of 10

Al-Ghazali and al-Kindi's Kalam Argument (5)

P1 - of anything that begins to exist, something causes it to exist
P2 - something cannot come out of nothing
P3 - universe began to exist
P4 - universe cannot have always existed
P5 - therefore there is a cause of existence of universe

2 of 10

Descartes' defence (5) (1/2)

Descartes: three categories of thoughts
1) ideas: sensible objects i.e images, sounds etc
2) volitions: emotions such as anger/hope
3) judgements: reflecting on truth of cognito

One can't be wrong about ideas and if God is an idea in the mind which must truly exist bc it exists in mind's eye (image) so God at least exists in the mind

Sources of ideas: innate, fabricated from other ideas, experienced

3 of 10

Descartes' defence (5) (2/2)

First strand of argument:
P1 - everything has a cause
P2 - avoiding infinite regress requires something without a cause (supernatural)
P3 - God doesn't have a cause
C - God is first cause

Second strand of argument
P1 - when causes produce effects, cause > effect
P2 - formal causes are those than produce effect which shares characteristics of effect i.e fire causing fire
P3 - eminent causes produce effects with different characteristics i.e potter causing pot (having intentional reality)
P4 - omni God must have been caused by something with equal/greater amount of intentional reality as formal/eminent cause
P5 - God is greatest thing possible
P6 - only God could cause God
C - innate idea of God must have come from God so God must exist

4 of 10

Swinburne's cosmological argument (2)

  • God as best explanation bc neither science/philosophy can give better answer so it's best to give a worse answer > no answer
5 of 10

Copleston's defence (5)

P1 - things exist in universe continently
P2 - something contingent requires explanation for existence
P3 - if everything is dependent on contingent beings, there is infinite regress
C - only God is necessary so he must exist

6 of 10

Hume's criticisms (7) (1/3)

1) not every event has cause bc it's a synthetic truth + we can't apply causes to start of universe
2) bc time came into existence with universe, universe didn't start at a time so it has no beginning
RESPONSE
Science: universe is approx 15 billion years old + anything with finite past must have a cause of existence
CRITICISM
Cause cannot exist in time if time didn't exist in universe -> eternal God
RESPONSE
Cause is outside of time -> eternal God

7 of 10

Hume's criticisms (7) (2/3)

3) is concept of necessary being meaningful?

  • No such thing as being that cannot be imagined to not exist. If necessary beings exist, it doesn't have to be God, could be pantheism
    4) Why presume need for cause?
  • Argument claims to be able to argue from things within our experience to things outside our experience, could be more down individual interpretation - some see religion, others don't so universe could be religiously ambiguous
    5) Why look for explanation for whole?
  • Is it not enough to explain different parts? Gardener-Sharpe's cake - why is there cake rather than why cut in that way? Explain whole then parts
    CRITICISM
    Universe appears to be different
    6) is infinity of causes possible?
  • "Something has always existed and caused what existed next" isn't analytic in the that infinite regress isn't possible
    CRITICISM
  • does this make sense? Causation occurs in time, time came into existence with universe so whatever caused universe can't occur before universe
8 of 10

Russell's criticisms (7)

  • reductio ad absurdum (just bc everything in universe has cause/mother, doesn't mean universe has single cause/mother
    CRITICISM
    Copleston: turns empirical concept into abstract one, overarching argument: why does there have to be an explanation, universe as "brute fact" so if it's reasonable to seek explanation for universe, reasonable to seek explanation to do so for God
9 of 10

Criticisms (7)

  • even if universe has beginning, it could have been caused by previous universe therefore something always existed
    CRITICISM
  • infinite regress
  • doesn't make sense; to reach present, infinite amount of time would have to pass but this is possible
10 of 10

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Philosophy resources:

See all Philosophy resources »See all Ideas of gods resources »