• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Examine the strength of the cosmological argument for the existence of god

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

I) 'Examine the strength of the cosmological argument for the existence of god' The term cosmological comes from the Latin word 'cosmos' meaning the universe. The cosmological argument is an argument that starts from the existence of the universe and tries to prove from this god exists. The cosmological argument is a priori argument but it is based on a aposteriori evidence. This makes it an inductive argument. Nothing comes from nothing, therefore the best and simplest explanation for the universe is God. The argument is in three forms; motion, causation and being. These are also the first three ways in the five ways presented by Aquinas through which he believed the existence of God could be shown. The cosmological argument and is a posteriori, meaning we all have experience of the universe, making the argument easier to understand. This being one of the main strengths of the argument since we can relate to the universe and how it works and noticing that something or someone must have designed it. The First Cause Argument is concerned with the fact that all things have a cause, and if we trace back the chain of causes, there must be an initial cause which began everything else. ...read more.

Middle

cause, something that is so complex as the world we live in and the universe around us, everything that exists must have a cause, he argues that the planet cannot just be it has to have something or someone to direct it. Also take the example of an aeroplane, it's to complex and designed just to be there by it self the plan cannot just be. If we take the example of the plane and compare it to the universe and see how complicated they both are we can understand that, there must be a causer or director for the Universe, as again, it can not just be. Overall its what your belief is and how you see each argument to see which one you'd agree and go along with. The main strengths of the argument are that, there is a first cause something has to be started off by someone else, if simple questions can be answered like, 'How did the lift go up' - because of the electric system that enables it to moves, this means the universe could be caused by someone, this is God. ...read more.

Conclusion

If god, is believed to be omnipotent, benevolent, and omniscient, if it was created so god could carry out all of these, looking at the world it's hard to believe. The cosmological argument is balanced out with for and against arguments, because for every argument in favour for the cosmological argument, there is an argument against it. For example the argument of dependency has been caused, means the argument that is going against it is 'what caused god?' The most strengthened argument, which is easiest to understand, is to believe in something rather than nothing. However Occam's razor replies to this bus saying it is easier to believe in the simplest explanation that the universe just is. In conclusion the arguments for and against are both balanced as for every strength, there is a weakness. In my opinion you cannot decide which argument to go for because whatever strength there is to the argument there is a weakness to back it up, or no evidence to make it enough to be able to believe. This could even try to change the opinion of someone trying to be convinced, therefore the arguments are overall balanced but with not enough evidence to be sufficient. ?? ?? ?? ?? Ashleigh Johnson ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Philosophy section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Philosophy essays

  1. Describe the main strengths and weaknesses of the cosmological argument for the existence of ...

    Therefore, the cosmological argument begins by accepting the premise that all things are contingent. If all things are contingent, i.e., if all things can go out of existence and do not necessarily exist, then there must be a time where all things go out of existence.12 Aquinas appeals to the

  2. Explain the cosmological argument for existence of God

    The necessary being is formally known as G-d who is needed to start off the chain of dependant beings which need a necessary being in order for their existence to come about. A Dependant being cannot exist without being caused to exist by something which is not dependant and in

  1. The Cosmological Argument

    Why do some, philosphers reject this argument? (6) Some, philosphers reject the cosmological argument because they see flaws in the argument and with the success of the scientific theories in describing events, most people have now come to believe that God allows the universe to evolve according to his pre-set laws and doesn't intervene.

  2. Outline the Cosmological Argument for the existence of God.

    Another weakness in the argument was proposed by David Hume, who argued that it was illegitimate to move from saying that every event in the universe has a cause, to the conclusion that the universe as a whole has a cause.

  1. Explain the Cosmological argument for the existence of God.

    Aquinas' third way is the way of "Contingency". The Cosmological argument argues that everything in the universe is contingent and therefore is all dependant on something else, by this logic there must be one non-contingent being on which all contingent beings rely for existence.

  2. Examine the main strengths and weakness of the Cosmological argument for the existence of ...

    On these grounds, the Kalam argument (a version of the Cosmological argument), as developed by al-Kindi and al-Ghazali, concludes that as the universe came into being, it must therefore have a cause. Both Aquinas (in his second way) and F.C.

  1. Examine the strengths and weaknesses of - The Thomist Cosmological Argument of the Existence ...

    The advantage of this, is that the argument is based on something from which we have sense experience, in this case the universe. The first premise of the Cosmological Argument is a posteriori. Because it is based on what can be seen and experienced in the universe, it is incontestable,

  2. Assess whether the cosmological argument proves the existence of God.

    not be explicitly obvious that it was indicating to the God of classical theism. We could posit another being there as its cause, as there is no evidence pointing to the God of classical theism. However it could be argued, that everything is a product of its context and Al-Ghazali

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work