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

Explain Aquinass cosmological argument

Extracts from this document...


Explain Aquinas's cosmological argument Aquinas was a Christian philosopher who sought to prove the existence of God through A posterior evidence of what he could see within the universe. Much of his argument is derived from the philosophy of Aristotle, who argues that everything in the universe is the result of a chain of events and therefore there must be something responsible for the begging of everything, this is an eternal substance that is immune to death, change and decay. Aristotle called this the prime mover. Aristotle's prime mover causes the movement of all other things, not by giving it a push but as the end result of the movement - it attracts movement like milk attracts a cat. This is important because in the case of an efficient cause giving a push, the thing giving the push would be affected. However the milk is not affected just as the prime mover is not affected .The prime mover is perfect and everything is drawn to it because it wants to share in its perfection. The prime mover is God, but not in the sense of the Christian God that is active in the universe. Aristotle thought God didn't create the universe and is external to it; Aristotle's God has no interest in the universe, but is a force of perfection that everything is drawn to. Aquinas however, wanted to prove the Christian God and creator. ...read more.


He also makes a huge leap from the observation that everything in the universe has a cause and a mover, to the universe has a cause and a mover. Also, the universe is not necessarily finite, since matter cannot be created or destroyed it is possible that the universe has always been there and there is an infinite regression of causes. Aquinas also contradicts himself by saying that nothing is infinite yet expecting us to accept the fact that God is an infinite being. Although Aquinas arguments support the view that God exists, there is no empirical evidence to prove his existence. Therefore the belief that God exists must be primarily based on faith and can only be reinforced by the cosmological argument. Explain the key criticisms of the cosmological argument David Hume said that we have no experience of the universes being made and so we cannot speak meaningfully about the creation of the universe. To move from 'everything we observe has a cause' to, 'the universe has a cause' is too big a leap for logic and that it is human nature to make connections between cause and effect, even if we have no experience or evidence to support the connection. He says that there is no evidence to suggest that the universe had a cause and that even if there was a cause, there is no proof that the cause of the universe was the god of classical theism. ...read more.


Burtrand Russell says that we cannot apply what happens within the universe to the universe itself, as it is beyond our understanding and that to go from saying that everything in the universe has a Mother, to the universe has a Mother, is too big a jump. He suggests that the universe could be simply a brute fact, a result of a series of coincidences. This will always be a strong argument as there is no evidence to suggest that the universe had a cause as this is beyond our experience, and it would be naive to assume that the universe is like the things within it. On the other hand, most people would like to believe that the universe has a cause and it's not just a coincidence that they exist, so they might be more inclined to accept the cosmological argument. In conclusion, although the cosmological argument is convincing to someone who wants to believe in a being bigger than themselves or already believes in God, it is not strong enough to prove the existence of God to a non believer as there is always the brute fact argument to contradict it. However, the cosmological argument does solve many of the problems regarding the conflict between science and religion as the big bang theory could be used to support the "prime mover" and the "uncaused cause "argument, this makes the cosmological argument compatible with modern ideas about science and makes it accessible to people in the modern world. . ...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 Practical Questions 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 Practical Questions essays

  1. Religious Language cannot be proved, therefore it is meaningless

    It is because of this belief we can talk of human qualities. In some way those qualities can be applied back to God. We can talk up to God using the same language.The only problem about the two analogies is they only work if you have previous knowledge of God.

  2. Consider the arguments for and against paid organ donation.

    accept for an organ, you cannot base a value for a kidney in the UK on the current transplant trade. It would be extremely hard to base a decent organ value on this existing trade because it is uncensored, so people may lie about the costs involved, many cases would

  1. Evaluate Korsgaard's discussion of the Universalizability Argument. In what ways does she conform with ...

    will never determined by some external law or principle, and that it only accords with its own law, and shows that this law, which is the categorical imperative, is the law of free will. This categorical imperative does not impose any external constraint on the free will's activities but arises from the nature of the will.

  2. Is Any Account of the State of Nature Convincing?

    Hobbes believed that this violence would continue to escalate into a constant state of fear, until the savagery of the State of Nature would become a 'State of War' or indeed even a war of 'all against all'. As a result of this, Hobbes says that our lives will be 'solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short'.

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