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

Outline the Cosmological Argument for the existence of God.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

The Cosmological Argument Q: Outline the Cosmological Argument for the existence of God. The Cosmological argument is an argument that starts from the existence of the universe, and from this attempts to prove the existence of God. The argument is a posteriori, i.e. it draws on experience from the material world. It is important to state that the most this argument can hope to prove is that there exists a necessary being who caused everything in the universe; it cannot arrive at the Judaic-Christian conception of God (i.e. an omnipotent, omniscient and all loving being). The Cosmological Argument is mainly attributed to St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274), although may well have originated from Platonic or Aristotelian ideas. The argument is also known as 'Aquinas third way'; the argument from contingency and necessity. Aquinas was already a firm believer, and so it is not entirely clear what the purpose of the arguments were; i.e. whether they were designed as a basis for faith, or as a reinforcement of faith. Aquinas starts his argument with what he considers to be a universal truth; that all things in the world come into and go out of existence, that they are contingent or depend upon other factors for their existence. ...read more.

Middle

This leads to the conclusion that there must be some being 'having of itself its own necessity', a being that is de re necessary. The ultimate conclusion is that this 'being' is what everyone calls God. Q: What are the strengths and weaknesses of the Cosmological Argument? There are many weaknesses of the Cosmological Argument as well as some strengths. The first question that has to be overcome before the Cosmological Argument can be successful (or even applicable), is; 'why does there have to be a cause for the universe?' If the answer to this question is ' there doesn't, the universe is just there', then the argument is useless. However, this is not a weakness in the argument itself and so will not be treated as such. The first and best strength of the Cosmological argument is that it starts from the seemingly indisputable fact that the universe exists. The argument also follows a logical form, guaranteeing a successful outcome, provided that the premises are true. However, this is where the strengths of the argument seem to end. ...read more.

Conclusion

A further weakness of the argument is whether or not the principal of sufficient reason is correct or not. Why should it be any more probable that there is a necessary cause than an infinite regression? I do not believe that this question can be answered. Immanuel Kant also criticised the Cosmological Argument as he held that it is impossible to speculate about something that lives outside space and time when we are confined to the limits of them. The final criticism that I will mention is the same as I mentioned at he beginning of this essay; that this argument is incapable of arriving at the existence of many peoples conception of God; that at best it can only prove the existence of a necessary being. The cosmological argument is, in my opinion, incredibly weak. I have only mentioned a few of the arguments against the Cosmological Argument and yet all of the strengths (that I can think of). I believe that the argument is out of date in the light of recent discoveries. However, despite this, considering the lack of knowledge of Aquinas it is of very logical form and may have been far more persuasive at the time. ...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, all things cannot be contingent. Corollary to this is the conclusion that there must then be such a thing as a necessary existence.16 Aquinas furthers his premise by supposing that there is a hierarchy of being with necessary existence, each lower being dependent upon the higher to infinity.

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

    Aquinas, a Christian philosopher, went on to say that the explanation for the universe and indeed its chains of events must be found outside the universe. He, in his "second way from cause" argued that this first cause must be God.

  1. 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

  2. St Thomas Aquinas and the Cosmological Argument

    The world is the sum total of all these things. 3. If everything within the world requires something else to exist, the cause of the entire universe must be external to the universe. 4. This explanation must be a being which exists, but which contains within itself the cause of its existence.

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

    This argument results to a God every time. Overall, Aquinas believes that the Universe is dependant on a God for its continued existence 'A play only lasts as long as the actor keeps acting' Richard Swinburne is in favour of the probability argument.

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

    Because Hume could not believe a connection between cause and effect, proved by his example of a game of billiards, he went on to say that causation is not a physical connection but just an association in our minds. Another opponent of the argument was Kant.

  1. The Cosmological Argument

    Time was looped and infinity an actuality. There could be no beginning and no end! Both Christians and scientists argue that the world and everything in it exists because of a 'first cause' assume this fact. Scientists would argue that the first cause was the Big Bang (Evolution).

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

    But the universe having a beginning has support from modern science, as the Big Bang claims that the universe began to exist from a single starting point, although the Big Bang and the cosmological argument may not be exactly reconcilable with each other, the point of the universe having a beginning is a shared principle.

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