The Cosmological Argument

?
  • Created by: ekenny5
  • Created on: 14-02-22 10:23

The Cosmological Argument 

It is an argumentt using human experience of the world, relying on inductive reasoning. The result is a probable conclusion, not a logical necessity. It is considered an a posteriori proof of God. 

It began in the kalam traditon, with links to Plato and Aristotle. Aristotle's work became popular in the middle ages as there was emphasis on observatiohn and obtaining data. Its popularity also increased when the Big Bang Theory and the Theory of Evolution were published as it allowed science and religion to exist in harmony. 

Thomas Aquinas;

Influenced by Aristotle, and valued a posteriori knowledge gained from empirical sources. He believed the ability to reason was a gift from God. He created three versions of his Cosmological argument:

  • there is a lot of change in the world (motion)
  • the world is governed by causation; everything has a cause
  • everything in the world exists contingently

Aquinas' First Way: Motion

  • evrything that moves is moved by something
  • the mover is also moved by something
  • there cannoy be an infinite chain of movers, or there would be no reason for movement to get started at all
  • there must be an unmoved mover, which moves everything without being moved itself
  • this we call God

Strengths:

  • probable conclusions are flexible 
  • appeals to experience of the world 
  • appeals to reason and logic
  • the unmoved mover shares some attributes with the Judaeo-Christian God
  • supported by Aristotelian thinking

Weaknesses:

  • probable conclusions aren't convincing enough
  • there could be an infinite chain of movers
  • unmoved mover does not share all attributes with God
  • Quantum physics challlenges the first and second premises, weakening the whole argument 

Stephen Hawking: the universe had a beginning (The Big Bang Theory) and time did not exist before the universe began. Anything that caused the universe to come about not only existed before it but was also outside of time, therefore the concept of that needing a cause is meaningless.

"so there must be a first mover, itself unmoved; this eveyone understands to be God" - Aquinas

Aquinas' Second Way: Causation:

  • everything has a cause
  • every cause has its own cause
  • there cannot be an infinite chain of causes 
  • there must be an uncaused cause, which causes everything without being caused itself 
  • this we call God

The analogy of the spinning plates - cause in esse - a cause that sustains, is needed for other things to continue to exist.

Strengths:

  • same as motion 
  • the inductive premises are supported by scientific theories like the Big Bang Theory

Weaknesses:

  • same as for motion

"we must admit a first efficient cause [itself uncaused] which everyone calls God"

Aquinas' Third Way: Contingency:

  • all things in our natural world are contingent 
  • if all existing things were contingent, then at one time, nothing would have existed
  • if there were such a time, then there would now be nothing, since something cannot cause itself 
  • there must be a necessary being, which caused everything
  • this we call God

Strengths;

  • same as motion
  • considered by many…

Comments

No comments have yet been made