COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS
SPECIFICATION
Cosmological arguments:
The Kalām argument (an argument from temporal causation).
Aquinas' 1st Way (argument from motion)
Aquinas’ 2nd Way (argument from atemporal causation).
Aquinas’ 3rd Way (an argument from contingency).
Descartes' argument based on his continuing existence (an
argument from causation).
Leibniz’s argument from the principle of sufficient reason (an
argument from contingency).
Issues:
the possibility of an infinite series
Hume's objection to the 'causal principle'
the argument commits the fallacy of composition (Russell)
the impossibility of a necessary being (Hume and Russell)
OVERVIEW:
Cosmology is the study of the cosmos (universe)
look at the origin of the universe to demonstrate God’s existence
, looks at why and how the universe came into existence. We intuitively think that the universe
must have an explanation or a cause
ask the question "Why is there something rather than nothing?"
--> have a posteriori premises -> draw on our observations of the universe and of causation.
--> aim to show the necessity of God, so many have a deductive form
CATEGORIES OF COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS:
1. From causation:
Kalam argument
Aquinas' first and second way
Descartes' argument
1. everything in the universe has a cause
2. the universe must have a cause
3. the cause is God (itself uncaused)
2. From contingency:
Aquinas' third way
Leibniz's principle of sufficient reason
1. everything in the universe is dependent on something else
2. the universe itself must be dependent on something else
3. This is God (itself necessary)
ARGUMENTS FROM CAUSATION:
1. Everything in the universe has a cause, 2. The universe must have a cause, 3. The cause is God.
*** KALAM ARGUMENT
(from temporal causation by Al-Ghazali + developed by William Lane Craig)
--> In defending this argument, Lane Craig claims that it presupposes the theory of time commonly
referred to as the A-theory of time, which is roughly the view that time really does flow from the non-
existent future into the present, and then out of existence into the past.
--> key premise = the universe has a beginning, because if it were infinite it would not need a cause.
--> tries to put forward the concept of an infinite regress
CRITICISMS:
SPECIFICATION
Cosmological arguments:
The Kalām argument (an argument from temporal causation).
Aquinas' 1st Way (argument from motion)
Aquinas’ 2nd Way (argument from atemporal causation).
Aquinas’ 3rd Way (an argument from contingency).
Descartes' argument based on his continuing existence (an
argument from causation).
Leibniz’s argument from the principle of sufficient reason (an
argument from contingency).
Issues:
the possibility of an infinite series
Hume's objection to the 'causal principle'
the argument commits the fallacy of composition (Russell)
the impossibility of a necessary being (Hume and Russell)
OVERVIEW:
Cosmology is the study of the cosmos (universe)
look at the origin of the universe to demonstrate God’s existence
, looks at why and how the universe came into existence. We intuitively think that the universe
must have an explanation or a cause
ask the question "Why is there something rather than nothing?"
--> have a posteriori premises -> draw on our observations of the universe and of causation.
--> aim to show the necessity of God, so many have a deductive form
CATEGORIES OF COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS:
1. From causation:
Kalam argument
Aquinas' first and second way
Descartes' argument
1. everything in the universe has a cause
2. the universe must have a cause
3. the cause is God (itself uncaused)
2. From contingency:
Aquinas' third way
Leibniz's principle of sufficient reason
1. everything in the universe is dependent on something else
2. the universe itself must be dependent on something else
3. This is God (itself necessary)
ARGUMENTS FROM CAUSATION:
1. Everything in the universe has a cause, 2. The universe must have a cause, 3. The cause is God.
*** KALAM ARGUMENT
(from temporal causation by Al-Ghazali + developed by William Lane Craig)
--> In defending this argument, Lane Craig claims that it presupposes the theory of time commonly
referred to as the A-theory of time, which is roughly the view that time really does flow from the non-
existent future into the present, and then out of existence into the past.
--> key premise = the universe has a beginning, because if it were infinite it would not need a cause.
--> tries to put forward the concept of an infinite regress
CRITICISMS:
