The Invalidity of the Cosmological Argument

975 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: strengths and weaknesses of the cosmological argument

Humans can never know for the certain why the universe was created or what caused it but, we can still create arguments and theories to best explain what might have created the universe. The cosmological argument is another idea to prove the existence of god. Many philosophers debate wheatear the cosmological argument is valid. The cosmological argument starts off quite simply: whatever exists must come from something else. Nothing is the source of its own existences, nothing is self-creating []. The cosmological argument states at some point, the cause and effect sequence must have a beginning. This unexpected phenomenal being is god. According to the argument, god is the initial start of the universe as we know it. Though nothing is self-creating cosmological believers say god is the only being the is self –created. Aquinas, an Italian philosopher, defended the argument and developed the five philosophical proofs for the existence of god knows as, the “Five Ways”.[]. In each “way” he describes his proof how god fills in the blanks of the unexplainable. The first way simply states that, things in motion must be put in motion by something. The second was is efficient because, nothing brings its self into existence. The third is, possibility and necessity [!]. Aqunhias’ has two more ‘ways’ but for the purpose of this essay I won’t be focusing on them heavily. These ways have started philosophers to debate and question his arguments ultimately made the cosmological argument debatable. The cosmological argument is however not a valid argument in explaining the existence of god because the conclusions do not logically follow the premises.
The main point in the cosmological argument is the first cause. As stated (by Aquinas) the world...

... middle of paper ...

...he conclusion does not logically follow. If nothing is self creating, god for whatever reason should not be an exception. Aquinas first way suggested thing in motion are put in motion something. Big Bang itself was a movement and god could not have set this motion himself, because it would mean god was put in motion by a something else in motion. By changing the conclusions for the cosmological argument to logically follow the premises would make it valid. Rather than forcing god as a conclusion, keeping an open mind and proposing counter arguments help us understand the possibilities out there. Maybe there is no god at all and the universe was always existed. Perhaps there was another universe prior to ours which was compressed so much the tiny spec of left exploded in a fraction of a second. Though the cosmological argument is invalid for explaining the existence

Show More
Related

  • The Main Strengths of the Cosmological Argument

    524 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Main Strengths of the Cosmological Argument There are many strengths within the Cosmological Argument which have proven theories and ways to prove the existence of God. Many of these strengths have come from such scholars as; Copleston, Aquinas and Leibniz, all of which have put together major points to prove the existence of a non-contingent being. One of the main strengths of the Cosmological Argument is from Aquinas way I that was about motion. This would be a posteriori argument because you need to gather evidence from the world around you.

    Read More

  • The Cosmological Argument Summary

    676 Words  | 2 Pages

    Within William Rowe’s Chapter two of “The Cosmological Argument”, Rowe reconstructs Samuel Clark's Cosmological Argument by making explicit the way in which the Principle of Sufficient Reason, or PSR, operates in the argument as well as providing contradictions of two important criticisms from Rowe’s argument.

    Read More

  • Anselm's Ontological Argument Essay

    794 Words  | 2 Pages

    Anselm’s argument can be summarized as, “1. God does not exist. (assumption) 2. By “God,” I mean that, than which no greater can be conceived (NGC). 3. So NGC does not exist. (from 1 and 2) 4. So NGC has being only in my understanding, not also in reality. (from 2 and 3) 5. If NGC were to exist in reality, as well as in my understanding, it would be greater. (from the meaning of “greater”) 6. But then, NGC is not NGC. (from 4 and 5) 7. So, NGC cannot exist only in my understanding. (from 6) 8. So NGC must exist also in reality. (from 5 and 7) 9. So God exists. (from 2 and 8) 10. So God does not exist and God exists. (from 1 to 9) 11. So Premise 1 cannot be true. (by 1 through 10 and the principle of reduction ad absurdum) 12. So God exists. (from 11)” (262). This quote demonstrates how Anselms ontological proof is “God is that, than which no greater can be conceived” in understanding and reality by stating that a contradiction would be made if God didn’t exist in both (262). Aquinas cosmological proof stated that the existence of God could be confirmed in five ways, The Argument- “from Change”, “Efficient Causality”,

    Read More

  • The Inadequacy of Paley's Argument from Design

    1258 Words  | 3 Pages

    After exhibiting faulty methods of argument and frequent logical fallacies, the teleological argument fails as a well-crafted argument. The content of this argument refuses to account for evolutionary theory, and fails to solve the burden of proof in showing how everything is designed deliberately. Even the criterion for god, which William Paley outlines, is faulty and unachievable by the current state of reality. Although the argument proves that an amalgamation of forces formed the universe, to consider them conscious is begging the question. Ultimately, the teleological argument is an inadequate and dated explanation for the creation of the universe.

    Read More

  • The Premise of the Cosmological Arguement and Some Objections

    1006 Words  | 3 Pages

    Parmenides of Elea once presented the expression ex nihilo nihil fit, which translates to nothing comes from nothing for one of his many theses. The Cosmological Argument, an argument of the posteriori category, meaning that it requires data based on past experiences, argues for the existence of God with this type of expression at its core. By attempting to prove how the universe must be influenced by an independent being that has godlike qualities, cosmological arguments suggest that it is rational to believe in an omnipotent being and its accountability of creating the universe.

    Read More

  • Bertrand Russell and Saint Thomas Aquinas’s Arguments on God's Existence

    595 Words  | 2 Pages

    ...t causation argument reasoned out in the first place. There had to be a beginning because “If there were no first efficient cause, there would be no last or intermediary efficient causes” (Aquinas, 45).

    Read More

  • St Thomas's Five Proofs

    1603 Words  | 4 Pages

    Modern science can explain many things. However, one of the things is yet to prove and will most likely never prove, is: why was everything was created? This is where God steps in. He is the only one who could have created the universe. Thus it can be concluded that the world could not have been created by chance. It is extremely complex and ordered, so much so, that it but must be the product of intelligent design. This is God.

    Read More

  • The Cosmological Argument and the Mystical Argument

    1119 Words  | 3 Pages

    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:

    Read More

  • Aquinas? Fifth Way Of Proving

    1118 Words  | 3 Pages

    Thomas Aquinas theorized five different logical arguments to prove the existence of God utilizing scientific hypotheses and basic assumptions of nature. In the fifth of his famous “Five Ways”, Aquinas sets forth the assumption that all natural bodies move toward an end. Since bodies are constantly moving in the best way possible to achieve that end, the path must be designed. God, of course, is the ultimate designer of the universe. The natural hypothesis that follows is that God created the universe, including the human race, for a purpose or to achieve an end, and thus the universe and all life moves toward that end constantly and in the best manner possible.

    Read More

  • The Strengths and Weaknesses of the Cosmological Argument for the Existence of God

    800 Words  | 2 Pages

    able to question the idea. It is also debatable as to whether or not a

    Read More

  • Argument For The Cosmological Argument

    1427 Words  | 3 Pages

    The cosmological argument is the existence of God, arguing that the possibility of each existing and the domain collected of such elements in this universe. The inquiry is that 'for what reason does anything exist? Why as opposed to nothing? In this paper, I will explain for what reason does everything need cause? Why is God thought to be the principal cause?

    Read More

  • The Kalam Cosmological Argument

    1084 Words  | 3 Pages

    1. David S. Oderberg, "Traversal of the Infinite, the “Big Bang” and the Kalam Cosmological Argument", Philosophia Christi 4 (2002): 305-36

    Read More

  • Thomas Aquinas Work to Prove the Existence of God

    1029 Words  | 3 Pages

    Being a devout Christian, Thomas Aquinas naturally believed in God, but he wanted to prove God's existence to those who could not accept things on faith alone. As a result he made five proofs, which he claims, prove the existence of God. With each proof there is always a beginning, a starting point, Aquinas claims it must be God that is the beginning of each. The first proof does not do complete justice to Aquinas’s claim that God exist, while the fifth proof could be used alone to prove Gods existence.

    Read More

  • The Five Proofs For The Existence Of God

    553 Words  | 2 Pages

    The second proof Aquinas gives us is that everything has a cause. A cause is an action that produces a result and nothing can happen without a cause. A perfect example of a cause is us human, we have to breathe in order to survive. A driver must push on the gas in order for the car to go. Nothing can cause itself because for it to be its own cause it would have to exist primer to itself. The universe does exist meaning it must have been created and everything in this world has a first cause and that first cause is God.

    Read More

  • Thomas Aquinas 'Uncaused Cause' Argument?

    1871 Words  | 4 Pages

    The nature of his argument makes the conclusion more compelling because his deductive attempt to prove overshadows Paley’s inductive attempt to suggest. Paley’s “Design” argument does not dispel the question of more than one designer, or “infinity, uniqueness, and perfection – the traditional attributes given to God” (“Paley’s Design Argument” Atkins, Philip). Aquinas addresses issues Paley leaves open for interpretation; the “uncaused cause” came first, and establishes the infinite nature of the God-like figure. Aquinas also states the relationship between cause and effect is real, “so that the first cause is not a first cause in time but a sustaining cause” (“Teleological Argument/Atheism”). If the first cause is taken away, then all of the resulting effects of it would disappear too. Therefore, the first cause exists now and forever, making Aquinas’ the more compelling, and least faulty, argument for the existence of

    Read More

More about The Invalidity of the Cosmological Argument

Open Document