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

The Cosmological Argument

Extracts from this document...


The Cosmological Argument The Cosmological Argument attempts to prove that God exists by showing that there cannot be an infinite number of regressions of causes to things that exist. It states that there must be a final uncaused-cause of all things. This uncaused-cause is asserted to be God. Arguments like this are thought up to recognize why we and the universe exist. The Cosmological Argument takes several forms but is basically represented below. Cosmological Argument Things exist It is possible for those things not to exist Whatever has the possibility of non-existence, yet exists, has been caused to exist. Something cannot bring itself into existence because it would have had to exist to do that. There cannot be an infinite number of causes to bring something into existence, because an infinite regression of causes has no original cause, which means there is no cause of existence. Since the universe exists, it must have a cause, therefore there must be an uncaused cause of all things. ...read more.


The only adequate explanation, the arguments suggest, is that God created it. What distinguishes the kalam cosmological argument from other forms of cosmological argument is that it rests on the idea that the universe has a beginning in time. Modal forms of the cosmological argument are consistent with the universe having an infinite past. With the kalam cosmological argument, however, it is precisely because the universe is thought to have a beginning in time that the existence of the universe is thought to stand in need of explanation. The argument has the following structure: (1) Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence. (2) The universe has a beginning of its existence. Therefore: (3) The universe has a cause of its existence. (4) If the universe has a cause of its existence then that cause is God. Therefore: (5) God exists. The key idea of the kalam cosmological argument is "The universe has a beginning of its existence". ...read more.


It is this that the argument from contingency takes to be significant. It is because it is thought that the universe exists contingently that its existence is thought to require explanation. If the universe might not have existed, then why does it exist? Supporters of the cosmological argument suggest that questions like this always have answers. The existence of things that are necessary does not require explanation; their non-existence is impossible. The existence of anything contingent, however, does require explanation. They might not have existed, and so there must be some reason that they do exist. The only adequate explanation of the existence of the contingent universe, the argument from contingency suggests, is that there exists a necessary being on which its existence it rests. For the existence of the contingent universe must rest on something, and if it rested on some contingent being then that contingent being too would require some explanation of its existence. The ultimate explanation of the existence of all things, therefore, must be the existence of some necessary being. Followers of the cosmological argument identify God as this necessary being. Isobel Manley ...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 ...

    To see why this is bad reasoning, see the difference between "Everybody loves somebody" and "There is somebody that everybody loves." The first could be true if the whole human population was divided into loving couples, but the second could only be true if there was one person receiving everybody's

  2. Explain the cosmological argument for existence of God

    However, scientists have proven that sub-atomic particles can come into existence without a cause. Scientists today do not believe that it is a law that everything must have a cause, especially at the subatomic level in modern physics. This is damaging to Aquinas' argument because one of the conditions is

  1. What are the key ideas of the cosmological argument?

    How far do the strengths outweigh the weaknesses? Though this argument is strong, it also has many weaknesses, come very obvious but confusing. The first is the unanswered question of 'who caused god?' within the Cosmological Argument. Thomas Reid supports this saying "it is common sense everything has a cause?"

  2. Outline the Cosmological Argument-

    This parallel to the first way. The thing that causes other things to exist is the uncaused causer, which is God. Leibniz's adds to the argument he said if you believe in an infinite regression of causes there would not be what he calls 'sufficient reason' meaning a complete explanation.

  1. St Thomas Aquinas and the Cosmological Argument

    The appeal to Imagination William Temple "[...] it is impossible to imagine infinite regress [...but] it is not impossible to conceive it". He meant that something is unthinkable if we cannot hold the concept without contradiction. The concept of a square circle cannot exist because the two words conflict each other.

  2. Cosmological argument

    a world with flaws in order to produce the best environment in which we could grow morally and spiritually, after all there does seem to be some proof for this occurring in the world as people who go through struggles often claim a new sense of self and moral awareness

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

    This is called the efficient cause, the cause that keeps the given subject going. Aquinas here does not seem to consider the possibility of an infinite series of contingent things which overlap each other, as J.L Mackie pointed out and so if this were to be the case then there

  2. The Cosmological Argument

    However, this series cannot be infinite, for then there would be no first mover and thus no motion. We can see motion in the universe, and thus there must be a first mover, which has been moved by no other, that explains the bringing about of motion and change, and

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