The cosmological argument has several different forms and seeks to prove the existence of an external necessary being which caused the universe to come into existence. This external agent according to the cosmological argument is God. It is an a posterior argument meaning it is based on our experience of the universe around us. Plato and Aristotle were the first to postulate views on the idea that the universe could not exist without a mover. They both argued that the fact of motion needs a prior agency to motivate it and this mover itself would not need a further mover itself as it would be a prime mover, a necessary being.
Examine the cosmological argument for the existence of God. – 25Marks The cosmological argument is an argument which proves the existence of the first cause; the first cause is ’motion’. In which everything that exists is in motion or has the potential to change. Meaning all change is caused by something, as nothing can more by itself therefore there must be a necessary being, like a God. The cosmological argument is a posteriori argument and also a deductive argument; this is because it is based on logical thinking about the existence of God.
One of Aquinas’ ways of proving God’s existence; ‘the uncaused causer’, states that every cause in the universe has an effect, the chain of cause and effect must have a terminus to avoid infinite regress. Aquinas rejects infinite regress because it denotes that there cannot be an answer to the question “what is the explanation?” Therefore there must be a necessary being that started the chain, this for Aquinas is God but this is not a satisfactory answer for everyone. Bertrand Russell, somewhat like Aristotle, states that the universe is a “brute fact”, although unlike Aristotle did not see that there needed to be a Prime Mover or Uncaused Cause. Russell made another criticism when he suggested that one cannot go from saying that every event has a cause thus the whole universe has a cause, it is like moving from saying that every human being has a mother to the claim that the human race as a whole has a mother. One cannot move from individual causes to the totality (whole, everything) has a cause.
Simply put, the fine-tuning argument contends that the universe was designed to ultimately create human beings. Fine-tuning is an argument which is able to contest one of the atheist’s own theories to disprove God. This will be explained in more detail later in this paper. In response to this, McCloskey says the cosmological argument “does not entitle us to postulate an all-powerful, all-perfect, uncaused cause.” As mentioned before, the cosmological argument is but one part of a concurrence for the existence of God. It does not prove God’s existence; it argues that there must be a necessary being which created the universe.
Outline two key objections to the Ontological Argument and explain the responses made to them. The ontological argument was first introduced by Anselm in the ‘Prosologian’. It is an a priori argument as it is not based on empirical evidence but id deductive and analytic in that it allows one to use logical reasoning to reach a logically necessary conclusion which, in theory, cannot be disputed. Anselm defines God as ‘that than which nothing greater can be conceived’ (TTWNGCBC) and states that everyone, theist or not, can accept this definition. He argues that ‘the fool’ in Psalm 53 can conceive of God but fails to believe he exists.
It is important to see that since no claim is made as to the certainty of the conclusion but only as to its probability, the argument cannot be criticized on the grounds that the conclusion does not follow with absolute necessity. 2. Also, note that the concept of design involves the ability of human beings either to grasp intellectually the order of things or to impose intellectually order on what is being observed. 2. The teleological argument was used by St Thomas Aquinas as one of his Five Ways of knowing that God exists, but the most cited statement of the argument is that of William Paley.
Assess the claim that the universe provides no evidence for the existence of an omnipotent god’ 35 marks It is often claimed by philosophers that the universe provides no evidence for the existence of an omnipotent god due to the fact there are flaws in this argument. Firstly, the idea of god being omnipotent, simply means that god would be ‘all-powerful to do anything that is possibly logical to do’, which is an idea explored by Aquinas. This idea would solve problems created by Dawkins who suggested the idea that god being omnipotent is incoherent. Yet by suggesting that god is all powerful in things that is logical would mean that he would not do illogical such as change the past of change what humans believe is fact such as 2+2=4. Therefore both Aquinas and Dawkins would suggest that the God could in fact be an omnipotent being as it is still logical for him to be so.
Alex Griffiths AO1: Examine the main features of the cosmological argument (21) AO2: Comment on the view that the weaknesses of the cosmological argument show it is a failure (9) The cosmological argument is an a posteriori argument based on the existence of the universe. The argument is based on the fact that the universe exists but is also based on the assumption that there must be an explanation for its existence and that this explanation is infact God. Thomas Aquinas is the scholar behind this argument and he believed that everything we observe today has a first mover and therefore there has to be a first cause (a first cause) in order for the universe to exist. The argument concludes that this first mover is God. Infinite regress is rejected by this argument, it argues that there has to be a first cause, and explanation for the existence of the universe.
Present and critically assess one version of the ontological argument for the existence of God. (This can be an existing version, such as Anselm’s or Descartes’, or a generic or composite version.) The ontological argument is a priori argument that means that it is based on reasoning and independent of experience. With the ontological argument being a prior it gives a theoretical certainty, like in mathematics the idea that 1+1=2. In this essay I am going to focus on Anselm ontological argument and comment on its strengths and weakness of his argument to prove the existence of God.
Existence is a part of perfection. While the ontological argument can be approached without the use of consciousness or awareness, cosmological and teleological arguments require a closer focus on the cause and the design of the universe. In earlier years Plato, then Aristotle stressed the cosmological argument as cause and motion, whereas Thomas Aquinas’ concept focused on life having a cause or a starting point. According to his premise the universe is a series of causes and the first cause would be what everyone understands to be God. This concept leads to other debates that mock the well-known adage “Which comes first, the chicken or the egg”.