The controversial topic involving the existence of God has been the pinnacle of endless discourse surrounding the concept of religion in the field of philosophy. However, two arguments proclaim themselves to be the “better” way of justifying the existence of God: The Cosmological Argument and the Mystical Argument. While both arguments attempt to enforce strict modus operandi of solidified reasoning, neither prove to be a better way of explaining the existence of God. The downfall of both these arguments rests on commitment of fallacies and lack of sufficient evidence, as a result sabotaging their validity in the field of philosophy and faith. First off, The Cosmological Argument was developed by St. Thomas Aquinas in 1274 through his work entitled Summa Theologica (otherwise known as Five Ways). Its purpose was to prove God’s existence through sensory perception. In Part One, Article Three of Prima Pars, Aquinas states that in order to debate, one must become involved in the opposing argument, then afterwards argue their view. In this case, one must look at both the argument for God’s existence (Theism) and for God’s non-existence (Atheism) in order to truly understand the argument that they are arguing for or against. The cosmological argument is divided into three parts, each containing varying sub-arguments: In the first part, Aquinas states that the existence of god is not self-evident, meaning that reason alone without appealing to faith can give a good set of reasons to believe. To support this claim, Aquinas refers to “The Argument of Motion”, proposing that: 1) Some things are in motion (an ‘a. posteriori’1 claim) 2) Whatever is moved is moved by another [for nothing can be or should be moved itself (pg. 128)] 3) ... ... middle of paper ... ...or.org/discover/10.2307/40021208?uid=3739448&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=3737720&uid=4&sid=21103070119093> 6- Kemerling, Garth. "Berkeley's Immaterialism." Berkeley's Immaterialism. N.p., 2011 Nov. 12. Web. 28 Nov. 2013. . 7- Downing, Lisa,. "George Berkeley." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford University, 10 Sept. 2004. Web. 28 Nov. 2013. . 8- McDermid, Douglas. "God's Existence." PHIL 1000H-B Lecture 9. Trent University, Peterborough. 21 Nov. 2013. Lecture. 9- Bennett, Jonathan. "Berkeley and God." Cambridge University Press: Royal Institute of Philosophy: Philosophy 40.153 (1965): 207-21. Print. 10- "Definition of Neoplatonism in English." Neoplatonism. Oxford Dictionaries, 2013. Web. 29 Nov. 2013. .
Coherence is an essential part of the theist’s belief structure. The individual arguments when joined collectively hold just that, coherence. While individually they do not point to evidence together they do. This coherence forms a basis of truth, supporting each other in their claim and not contradicting them. In this manner they establish truth where facts are lacking. If we examine independently the arguments presented by McCloskey they too lack adequacy to establish the nonexistence of God.
The question of God’s existence has been debated through the history of man, with every philosopher from Socrates to Immanuel Kant weighing in on the debate. So great has this topic become that numerous proofs have been invented and utilized to prove or disprove God’s existence. Yet no answer still has been reached, leaving me to wonder if any answer at all is possible. So I will try in this paper to see if it is possible to philosophically prove God’s existence.
Typically, cosmological arguments occur in two different phases. The first phase’s purpose is to provide the premise that there is a ‘first cause’ or an independent being that caused the creation of our universe, while the second phase’s purpose is to argue that this being has godlike features like omnipotence and immanence. To justify the claims in these phases, the Cosmological Argument takes into consideration the Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR), which is the principle that there is an explanation for the existence of every single thing (referred to as PSRa), and for every positive fact (referred to as PSRb). This principle is a key element of the cosmological argument as it provides rationale to the premises of the argument with what appears to be obvious facts.
...ch allows us to perceive physical objects, than it must be God. Therefore, following Berkeley thought, when we talk about matter, we are talking about God. That which we attribute to matter must refer to God, the revealer of ideas corresponding to material things. It would then follow that it is God who is the True Essence of physical objects and not atoms, photons, or protons. However, this explanation may be just as commonsensical as his explanation against science in that neither God nor matter has been proven scientifically to exist. Both are theoretical ideas. Since neither God nor matter can be proven to exist, it would follow that Berkeley’s theory of external objects is just as commonsensical as postulating that physical objects contain atoms, photons ect, (reality consists of matter) and that God does not exist--the materialistic/ functionalistic theory.
To begin, proof of God’s existence is seen in the group of cosmological arguments. The cosmological arguments are a set of arguments that demonstrate the existence of a sufficient reason or first cause of the existence of the cosmos, or the universe as a whole. There are three different types of cosmological arguments, the Kalam, Thomist and and Leibnizian cosmological arguments. Proponents of the cosmological argument include Plato, Aristotle, and John Locke. Contemporary defenders include William Lane Craig, Alvin Plantinga and Richard Swinburne.
(1) J. L. Schellenberg, Divine Hiddenness and Human Reason (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1993), p. 83.
Throughout the Dialogues between Philonous and Hylas, Berkeley presents a moderately compelling case (with the exceptions of a few logical flaws, as stated above) for the existence of qualities solely within the mind. Secondary qualities, he shows most definitely exist within the mind, through a number of thought experiments. He also proves, however, that those qualities which we term primary qualities are not in fact primary, and instead exist within the mind. To explain our sense of objective reality, Berkeley turns to God, and argues that these qualities exist within the mind of God. Berkeley’s dialogues remain one of the strongest supporting documents for idealism.
ABSTRACT: The Third Way is the most interesting and insightful of Aquinas' five arguments for the existence of God, even though it is invalid and has some false premises. With the help of a somewhat weak modal logic, however, the Third Way can be transformed into a argument which is certainly valid and plausibly sound. Much of what Aquinas asserted in the Third Way is possibly true even if it is not actually true. Instead of assuming, for example, that things which are contingent fail to exist at some time, we need only assume that contingent things possibly fail to exist at some time. Likewise, we can replace the assumption that if all things fail to exist at some time then there is a time when nothing exists, with the corresponding assumption that if all things possibly fail to exist at some time then possibly there is a time when nothing exists. These and other similar replacements suffice to produce a cogent cosmological argument.
Dr. William Lane Craig supports the idea of existence of God. He gives six major arguments, in order to defend his position. The first argument is quite fare, Craig says that God is the best reason of existence of everything. He gives the idea, that the debates between all the people, cannot reach the compromise, because the best explanation of the reasons of existence of everything is God, and nothing can be explained without taking Him into consideration. The second argument of Craig is from a cosmological point of view: he says that the existence of the universe is the best proof of the existence of God. Because, the process of the creation of the universe is so ideally harmonious, that it seems impossible to appear accidentally. The third argument is about the fine tuning of the universe. The universe is designed in such a way that people always have aim of life, and the life of people and the nature are interconnected. The fourth argument of Dr. Craig is about the morality: God is the best explanation of the existence of the morality and moral values in people’s lives. The...
Aquinas theological argument is a traditional argument that tries to explain the existence of God, through observation of the design, order, and by showing us that faith can be founded in a reason. If we started to thoroughly observe all of the urbanity and incredible detail around us we will find out that the universe could not have occurred by chance.
It is my view that God exists, and I think that Aquinas’ first two ways presents a
...ere God creates substance and everything associated with it. Conversely, without a belief in God, Berkeley's position cannot be put forth, as there would be nothing to create the perceptions, and Locke's position becomes more likely. And if your faith leads you to the conclusion that there is no God, then you must put your faith in a material world for there is no other consistent world of which you could conceive.
One action that is often attributed to God is the creation of the universe. Due to the complexity of the universe’s design and how it came into existence, it can be suggested that it was created by a timeless and/or immaterial, rational being (i.e. God). Among academics, this is often known as the teleological argument and cosmological argument. This is demonstrated in the debate between and William Lane Craig and Antony Flew, in 1998. Craig demonstrates the self-contradiction of the infinite possibilities of the past; rather there are finite events and the universe (something) likely came from nothing. As such, it is likely that the cause of the universe exists, and is God. Craig discusses the order and
1) Oxford Readings in Philosophy. The Concept of God. New York: Oxford University press 1987
In this paper I will be exploring two arguments on the topic of the existence of God. In particular, I will focus on Saint Thomas Aquinas’s efficient causation argument for God’s existence and an objection to it from Bertrand Russell. After an analysis of Aquinas’s argument and a presentation of Russell’s objection, I will show how Russell’s objection fails.