...The Cosmological Argument An important argument to try and prove the existence of God is the Cosmological Argument brought on by observations of the physical universe, made by Saint Thomas Aquinas, a thirteenth century Christian philosopher. The cosmological argument is a result from the study of the cosmos; Aquinas borrows ideas from Aristotle to make this systematically organized argument. Aquinas’ first point begins with the observation that everything is moving. Aquinas’ says that everything that moves must be moved by another moving thing, which has to be moved by another moving thing and so on. This cannot be infinite though, because consequently the motion of the series would have no origin, and the origin of this series cannot be moving because then there would have to be something moving it. Therefore, God, being a perfect, unmoved, uncaused being, would have to be the unmoving origin, “The First Mover”, of the series of moving things. The second point made by Aquinas’ is that everything is caused and what is caused to exist has to be caused by another thing because nothing can cause its own self to exist. This chain of caused things caused by another thing cannot be endless because that would mean there would be no beginning to cause the existence therefore, the existence of the origin of this chain of caused things would have to be uncaused. So God would have to be the first uncaused, non dependent origin of all the other existing caused things. Regarding Aquinas’...
Words: 654 - Pages: 3
...The cosmological argument (i) Examine the view that the cosmological argument provides an explanation for the world and is a trustworthy basis for belief in the existence of God. (21) The cosmological argument, also known as the first cause argument, is a classical argument for the existence of God. The word cosmological comes from the Greek for order and it is an inductive argument as the premises are true but the conclusion may not be, and it is also synthetic where the truth is determined by experience and needs to be proven. It is also a posteriori and also based on natural theology. The Cosmological argument finds its answer for the start of the universe through causes, meaning everything is caused by something, or everything is dependent on something else. The argument attempts to find proof for God’s existence stating that as something cannot come from nothing God must exist in order for anything and everything else to exist. The origins of the cosmological argument come from Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle. Plato 428-347 BC records one of the earliest versions of the Cosmological arguments in his book of ‘Laws’. Plato writes about the argument through an exchange between an Athenian and Clianis. The Athenian attempts to prove the existence of the gods by arguing that, of all the different types of motion, the motion “which can move itself” is “necessarily the earliest and mightiest of all changes”. It is clear from his argument that infinite regress...
Words: 1053 - Pages: 5
...The Cosmological argument argues for the existence of God a posteriori based on the apparent order in the universe. For Aristotle, the existence of the universe needs an explanation, a cause, as it could not have come from nothing. Nothing comes from nothing so since there is something, there must have been some other thing that is its cause. Aristotle rules out an infinite progression of causes, so, that led to the conclusion that there must be a First Cause. Likewise with motion, there must have been a first cause; Aristotle calls this the ‘Prime Mover’. There is a God, says Aristotle -for how else does motion begin? Whilst this argument does generally offer some support for the existence of God, it does not prove his existence. Aquinas believed that, since the universe is God's creation, evidence of God's existence can be found in his creation using intellect and reason, as such a concept of God is beyond all direct human experience. Hence, he devised his 'Five Ways,' 5 a posteriori arguments for the existence of God, based on our empirical experience of the universe. The Cosmological argument rests on the first three of Aquinas' Five Ways. The first way is called the argument from motion or ‘change’. It is in this first way that Aquinas follows Aristotle’s ‘prime mover’ thesis. The first way (The 'Kalam' argument) follows as: • Everything in the world is moving or changing • Nothing can move or change by itself • There cannot be an infinite regress of things changing other...
Words: 949 - Pages: 4
...b) To what extent was Hume successful in his critique of the cosmological argument? [10]Hume makes some very important challenges to the Cosmological argument which some believe count decisively against it. One of the key areas he calls into question is the argument’s dependence upon what Leibniz termed the principle of sufficient reason. In this principle an adequate explanation must be a total explanation. The universe requires an explanation of itself as a whole. But many would say, as Russell later told Copleston: “Then I can only say that you’re looking for something which can’t be got, and which one ought not to expect to get.” If you have explained each individual element of a series any explanation of the series as a whole would seem to be superfluous, and besides he says that ‘the whole’ doesn’t really exist anyway – it is ‘an arbitrary act of mind’ that makes things into wholes. What we term the ‘whole universe’ in modern physics may be only a bubble in a larger reality that we have no way of grasping. Also if we are only entitled to talk about causes when we have had experience of them, then this argument would seem to be over-stretching itself in speculating upon what it cannot know. On the other hand, there is of course a problem with stopping at a certain point and saying that we should seek no further explanation, in that it is a basic presupposition of all scientific work. However, even though a principle of rationality is that we can find an explanation for...
Words: 2857 - Pages: 12
...Examine the cosmological argument for the existence of God. The cosmological argument is an a posteriori argument which intends to prove that there is an intelligent being that exists; the being is distinct from the universe, explains the existence of the universe, and is omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent and omnibenevolent. The basic notion of cosmological arguments is that the world and everything in it is dependent on something other than itself for its existence. It explains that everything has a cause, that there must have been a first cause, and that this first cause was itself uncaused. Many philosophers have explored the cosmological argument, including Aquinas, in much depth, through his Five Ways in the Summa Theologica. Thomas Aquinas rejected the ontological argument of Anselm, saying that had it been convincing, the existence of God would be self-evident to everyone. He argued that the fact people deny God’s existence is proof enough that it is not in fact self evident. Aquinas believed from faith that God existed and he believed that the real world contained enough evidence for this; Aquinas wrote the Five Ways in order to prove his beliefs. Each ‘way’ of the Five Ways is an exercise of reason, not of faith; they are the classical exposition of natural theology. The first three of the five ways are based on the cosmological argument. The first way that Aquinas proposed to support the cosmological argument regarded the ‘unmoved mover’; he stated that...
Words: 1393 - Pages: 6
...The cosmological argument The word “cosmos” means universe. The cosmological argument argues the existence of a first cause, God, from a posteriori and priori premise. It argues that the universe is contingent and therefore requires a cause, as nothing is the cause of itself. This is known as redicto- ad- absurdum. The argument is backed up by the five ways put forward by the 12th century theologian and philosopher, St Thomas Aquinas. In the 12th century, St Thomas Aquinas put forward 5 ways to prove the existence of God in his book “Summa Theologica”. Aquinas’s five ways to prove the existence of God are based on the work of Greek philosophers, Plato and Aristotle, whose work was later translated in Arabic, by Muslim philosophers Al- Kindi and Al- Ghazali, and then translated into Latin. I will be examining three of Aquinas’ ways, uncaused cause, unmoved mover and necessary being. As well as examining these three ways to prove the existence of God, I will be looking at their supporters and critics. Aquinas’ 1st way to prove the existence of God was the uncaused cause also known as the first cause. Aquinas considers the world in terms of “cause and effect” which means that without a cause there is no effect. Everything in the universe has a cause. Human beings have a cause (their parents) too. Aquinas argued that we could follow the chain of “cause and effect” all the way back, but there cannot be an infinite chain. There must be an uncaused cause, which causes everything...
Words: 1140 - Pages: 5
...Explain the cosmological argument with particular reference to: The rejection to infinite regress and god as the necessary being (30 Marks) The Cosmological Argument is a posteriori argument put forward by St. Thomas Aquinas. Gottfried Leibnitz also made a similar argument. In the Cosmological Argument, Aquinas said that he believed that all things in the world were caused to exist by something. The universe exists, so there must be something that caused the universe. He believed the first cause to be God. He said that God is the only thing that was not caused by something else. The argument seeks to prove the existence of God from looking at the world we live in and the universe as a whole. The whole theory is based on cause and effect (when one event causes another to happen, the cause is why it happens and the effect is what happens.) Aristotle believed that all movement depends on there being a mover, and there has to be something that originates this. The universe follows this principle so needs a mover – this is the prime mover. The mover caused everything to come into existence, however, needs nothing to cause it and so must be exempt from the laws of nature. Thomas Aquinas created five ways to prove the existence of God, the first proof is based on motion, It can be noted that some things in the universe are in motion and it follows that whatever is in the state of motion must have been placed in motion by another such act, and things achieve their potential through...
Words: 510 - Pages: 3
...The Kalam Cosmological Argument: (KCA) Of the things debated in society, perhaps nothing is more hotly contested than the existence of a God. Over the course of time there have been many arguments made from many different angles. For example, an argument in favor of existence is the teleological argument also known as “fine tuning,” or the “argument from design” argues that the universe is so organized as to suggest the necessity of a designer. (1) Likewise there are many arguments against the existence of a God; perhaps the most well know is the “problem of evil” which argues if there is an omniscient, omnipotent and morally perfect being, he (or she) would know where evil is, have the power to destroy it, and being morally perfect would...
Words: 929 - Pages: 4
...Outline the cosmological argument for the existence of God (21 marks) The cosmological argument aims to prove the existence of God whilst also providing an explanation for the beginning of the universe, with different views coming from various scholars. It is an a posteriori argument, meaning we can draw conclusions from experiences based on what we see around us, although it is not a fact. Despite the separate interpretations, the cosmological argument revolves around a first cause which started the universe. This cause is what we come to know as God, and the scholars mainly focus on different ways of proving his existence by looking at the world around us. When looking at the argument, Thomas Aquinas is the driving force behind most of its foundations and ideas. His first way from five in his book ‘Summa Theologica’, he outlines the need for a first cause because of the motion we see in the world. Nothing inanimate can move itself, and requires another force in order for it to go from potentiality to actuality. But everything has to be moved by something else which would go on infinitely, so something must have been the first mover. This first mover is understood to be God, who set the world in motion when he created it. This mirrors Aristotle’s ideas about planetary motion, and Aquinas believed God continues to keep the world functioning and moving. Furthermore, Aquinas’ second way also represents the cosmological argument as the way of causation. When you look at everything...
Words: 619 - Pages: 3
...A) Outline the cosmological argument for the existence of God “ A may be explained by B, and B by C, but in the end there will be some one object on whom all other objects depend” Richard Swinburne. The cosmological argument is an a posteriori argument which therefore basis it’s conclusions on observations and experience; this is difficult to challenge. Over many years, different scholars have added their opinions to Aristotle and Plato’s contributions, making that argument stronger. The most famous version of the cosmological is associated with the Christian apologist Thomas Aquinas. In his Summa theological he sets out to demonstrate that the universe requires an explanation and this explanation demands a necessary and non-contingent being, God. This ides is key at the heart of all cosmological arguments. “The series must start with something, since nothing can come from nothing” Metaphysics. Plato and Aristotle postulated the need for a craftsman for their arguments with the fact of motion, which, they argued, needs a prior agency to motivate it. This mover would, itself, have no further mover, because it would be a primes mover, which is a self-actualising, necessary being. Neither Aristotle nor Plato understood how the universe could exist without such a mover. Aquinas further developed this idea in his first and second way. Aquinas’ first way states that all things are in motion (a state of change: for Aquinas, “motion is the reduction of something from...
Words: 341 - Pages: 2
...Explain Aquinas’ Cosmological Argument The basis of the cosmological argument is that the universe cannot account for its own existence. There must be a reason, the argument says, for the existence of the universe and the reason has to be something which is not part of the physical world of time and space. The cosmological argument was used by Thomas Aquinas (1225-74) in his five ways, which were ways of demonstrating the existence of God through inductive argument based on observation and evidence. In Aquinas’ view, knowledge of God could be reached in two ways; one through revelation for example, through the words of the Bible and the other is through our own human reason. Aquinas thought that if we applied reason to the evidence that we see around us then we would be able to reach valuable truths. To show that God exists, Aquinas had presented it through five ways because he was convinced that although the existence of God was not self-evident, it could be demonstrated with logical thought. He wrote about the five ways in his book Summa Theologica. Of Aquinas’ five ways, the first three are different alternatives of the cosmological argument. His version of the argument was based on two assumptions: the universe exists and there must be a reason why. This was used as a starting point to explain the fact that there must be an explanation of why anything exists. In his first way, Aquinas concentrated on the existence of change or motion in the world. He considered the ways...
Words: 652 - Pages: 3
...Dissecting Clarke’s Cosmological Argument In the following paper, I will outline Samuel Clarke’s “Modern Formulation of the Cosmological Argument” and restate some of the points that he makes. Samuel Clarke’s argument for the existence of God states that “There has existed from eternity some one unchangeable and independent being” (37). The argument follows a logical flow and can be better understood when the structure is laid out and the argument reconstructed. Clarke begins his argument with a use of disjunctive syllogism, a form of valid logical reasoning that proposes two outcomes, denies one, and thus proves the other to be true. Clarke’s premise states that one of the two following statements must be true: either there has always existed one independent being that was the cause of all other beings that exist or ever existed, or else there have forever existed a series of dependent beings that caused one another. He calls the second option impossible for the reason that such a series cannot be the being that has existed from eternity because by definition it can have no external cause, and no internal cause can cause the whole series. The latter part of the premise is stated as false, making the first part true. Hence, an independent being exists. Clarke also uses another mode of argumentation called reductio ad absurdum, which argues that a point must be accepted by deriving absurdity from its denial. Clarke actually uses the word “absurd” to describe the theory...
Words: 796 - Pages: 4
...been discussed and argued over. Some people will always argue that God does exist, whilst others will argue that he doesn’t. Firstly I would like to start my argument with the famous 13th century philosopher, Thomas Aquinas. Aquinas’ argument is known as the cosmological argument. This is the idea of: the unmoved mover, the uncaused causer and idea of contingency, these three arguments are all a posteriori (based on the evidence in the universe around us). The unmoved mover is the concept that, in theory (is logically acceptable even for an atheist), that nothing can be in motion without something first putting it into motion. This argument is very similar to Aristotle’s, which is the idea that everything that changes shape, temperature or simply into something else must be changed by something. Aquinas argued that one thing leading to another infinitely, must be wrong. Something must have been there to cause the first movement. This is why Aquinas rejects the idea of infinite regress, as he believes, that something must have set the whole chain of reactions off, for example something has to push the first domino for the chain reaction to start, and this being for Christians is the unmoved mover or in other terms God. However, many atheists reject this theory as they believe that the idea of infinite regress is very plausible. For example Aquinas argued that for something to make something else hot, the thing that is doing the causing must be hot in the first place. On...
Words: 1571 - Pages: 7
...Arguments About God The question of God’s existence has plagued people across the planet as long as we have existed. It has shaped our lives and civilizations as a whole. Cosmological arguments for the existence of god are some the oldest. They have been supported by theorists such as Aristotle and Plato and philosophers throughout history. “They all begin with the empirical fact that the universe exists—and end with the conclusion that only God could be responsible for this fact” (63). While they take different forms, they all have this basic structure. Several of their forms were developed by St. Thomas Aquinas, one was his famous was the first-cause argument. It explains that everything that happens has a cause. So something must have been the first cause, which causes the second, and so on. God must be the first cause. Arguments against Aquinas’ question the idea that an infinite regress could not exist. Philosophers, like David Hume, state the universe needs no beginning, it could just be eternal. “The universe may have simply always been” (67). While cosmological appeals stand on the evidence mainly of experience, ontological arguments stand solely on logic. St. Anselm, originator of this theory, described god as “that which no greater can be conceived” (Oppy). He reasoned that nothing can be greater than a being that which no greater can be conceived therefore that being (God) exists. There are many objections to ontological arguments. One general criticism is that...
Words: 432 - Pages: 2
...have debated extensively on the existence or the nonexistence of free will in nature.one of this philosophical figure is David Hume, he maintains that humans are free because of decisions and their actions. This is so because though determined, they are determined by our individual motives. He demonstrated that determinism is a very integral part to the existence of individual free will. This therefore means that because our actions being determined causally by our motives and character human beings are morally responsible and are free willed. This then becomes a point of objection because if everything is caused, then what we decide is itself caused. Hume argues that human motives and desire is the Couse of their decisions. Determinism argument is not that we are free but that free will exists. The other philosopher who contributed this debate is Thomas Hobbes. He had a slightly different view on determinism and free will from those held by Hume. He said that God is the ultimate origin of every action, but if humans are not physically required to do any action, there is free will. Hobbes developed his thesis in name of liberty vs. necessity, as opposed free will vs. outwardly determined will. The order in which events followed leading to an individual being blown off a cliff by the wind can be said to have caused that event that was the necessary consequence of a sequence of causes. If person jumped off the cliff would also have a sequence of roots which made it to happen, but...
Words: 1165 - Pages: 5
