The cosmological argument for the existence of god -

The cosmological argument for the existence of god - topic One

A cosmological argument , in natural theology , is an argument which claims that the existence of God can be inferred from facts concerning causation , explanation, change, motion, contingency, dependency, or finitude with respect to the universe or some totality of objects. Whichever term is employed, there are two basic variants of the argument, each with subtle yet important distinctions: in esse essentiality , and in fieri becoming. The basic premises of all of these arguments involve the concept of causation. The conclusion of these arguments is that there exists a first cause for whichever group of things it is being argued has a cause , subsequently deemed to be God. The history of this argument goes back to Aristotle or earlier, was developed in Neoplatonism and early Christianity and later in medieval Islamic theology during the 9th to 12th centuries, and was re-introduced to medieval Christian theology in the 13th century by Thomas Aquinas. The cosmological argument is closely related to the principle of sufficient reason as addressed by Gottfried Leibniz and Samuel Clarke , itself a modern exposition of the claim that " nothing comes from nothing " attributed to Parmenides. Plato c. This required a "self-originated motion" to set it in motion and to maintain it. In Timaeus , Plato posited a "demiurge" of supreme wisdom and intelligence as the creator of the Cosmos.

Share your: The cosmological argument for the existence of god

Identify the parts of the fibrous layer Hamilton albert fish
White collar crime vs street crime statistics 758
The cosmological argument for the existence of god 638
JOHN CABOT FOR KIDS Eastern l 1011
the cosmological argument for the existence of god The cosmological argument for the existence of god

The cosmological argument for the existence of god Video

Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of God: Dr. Dean Zimmerman

Browse the database of more than essays donated by our community members! The Cosmological argument is an argument that starts from the existence of the universe, and from this attempts to prove the existence of God. The argument is a posteriori, i.

Philosophy of Religion

It is important to state that the most this argument can hope to prove are that there exists a necessary being who caused everything source the universe; it cannot arrive at the Judaic-Christian conception of God i. The Cosmological Argument is mainly attributed to St. Thomas Aquinasalthough may well have originated from Platonic or Aristotelian ideas. Aquinas was already a firm believer, and so it is not entirely clear what the purpose of the arguments was; i.

Aquinas starts his argument with what he considers to be a universal truth; that all things in the world come into and go out of existence, that they are contingent or depend upon other factors for their existence. He then moves on to state that if everything cannot exist if everything is contingentthen given infinite time, there will be a time when everything does not exist a time when there will be nothing.

Click next premise states that if there was once nothing, nothing could come out of it, which leads to the first conclusion of the argument; that something not necessarily God must necessarily exist.

Cite this page

This can be considered as the first half of the argument. The fifth premise of the argument is that everything is either caused or uncaused. Hence the next premise states that the series of necessary things cannot go on to infinity, as there would be no sufficient reason.

the cosmological argument for the existence of god

However, this is not a weakness in the argument itself and so will not be treated as such. Tge first and best strength of the Cosmological argument is that it starts from the seemingly indisputable fact that the universe exists. The argument also follows a logical form, guaranteeing a successful outcome, provided that the premises are true. The first apparent weakness of the argument is the first premise; that thing can either exist or not exist.

Want to add to the discussion?

For example, when I die, the arrangement and form of the energy matter that makes me up will no longer exist, and so in one sense, I will not exist. However, the energy itself will still be in existence. If the first premise is found wrong, the whole argument will be useless.

the cosmological argument for the existence of god

Another weakness in the argument was proposed by David Hume, who argued that it was illegitimate to move from saying that every event in the universe has a cause, to the conclusion that the universe ot a whole has a cause. A further weakness of the argument is whether or not the principle of sufficient reason is correct or not. Why should it be any more probable that there is a necessary cause than an infinite regression?

Argument On Cosmological Argument

I do not believe that this question can be answered. Immanuel Kant also criticised the Cosmological Argument as he held that it is impossible to speculate about something that lives outside space and time when we are confined to the limits of them.

the cosmological argument for the existence of god

The final criticism that I will mention is the same as I mentioned at the beginning of this essay; that this argument is incapable of arriving at the existence of many peoples conception of God; that at best it can only prove the existence of a necessary being. The cosmological argument is, in my opinion, incredibly weak.

I have only mentioned a few of the arguments against the Cosmological Argument and yet all of the strengths that I can think of.]

One thought on “The cosmological argument for the existence of god

  1. Not clearly

Add comment

Your e-mail won't be published. Mandatory fields *