Examine the View That the Cosmological Argument Provides an Explanation for the World and Is a Trustworthy Basis for Belief in God? (21)
1284 Words6 Pages
Examine the view that the cosmological argument provides an explanation for the world and is a trustworthy basis for belief in God? (21)
The cosmological argument is an à posterioriargument based ultimately on the existence of the cosmos, and the indication it leads to a supreme being generally identified as God. The existence of the universe, the argument claims needs an explanation or a cause, the only appropriate cause for this could be God, this argument is based on experience rather than theoretical logic. Aristotle claims ‘if there is movement and change then there must be an unmoved mover’ although there is one huge problem with this, why does God have no cause? Most scientists argue that "God" is not a scientifically proven cause, whereas Aristotle would argue that God is ‘a remote and unchanging being who allows his world to be changeable so that it can gradually move towards the perfection which he already enjoys.’ A further fault with this would be the principle that the universe can’t explain its own existence, Why is it here at all? Why is it like this? Why isn’t it different? Why something rather than nothing?. Critics such as Dawkins and Russell say the universe is here today due to ‘brute fact’ whereas Swinburne would argue highly with that and say ‘God is simpler than anything we could imagine and gives an explanation for the system’.
Incorporation Aristotle’s notion of a prime mover, Aquinas formulated his version of the cosmological or "first cause" argument. The first cause incorporates the theory that there must be a contingency/necessary being. According to this argument, the things which we see around us now are the products of a series of previous causes indicating a prime mover. But that series cannot go back in time forever. Thus there must be some first cause which was not itself caused by anything else this prime mover being God. The