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

The differences between the Cosmological Argument and the Teleological Argument for the existence of God.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

The differences between the Cosmological Argument and the Teleological Argument for the existence of God. The Cosmological Argument varies from the Teleological Argument for the existence of God. In brief detail, the Cosmological Argument explains in detail on how event will cause another event or effect. By this meaning that if one hundred dominoes are all lined up and they fell in line, domino number 100 would be the last to fall and would fall because domino number 99 made it, and domino number 98 made domino number 99 fall and so on. However, none of the dominoes would fall what so ever if domino number 1 hadn't been knocked down by someone or something. This example is simplifying how that everything must have an event and effect in history to this very day. ...read more.

Middle

Even if you just take a hedgehog for instance, even though they are very small, they very complicated in design, i.e. the way that they adapt to winter, the way that their lungs work, the food they eat, all these things have been planned. Then if you next look at the whole world, how could something so big and so extremely complicated just happen? Each argument for the existence of God is deeply thought out and makes some good points, however they both have their weak and strong points. The man who wrote the Teleological Argument is called F.R Tennant. The Teleological Argument is just stating that there must have been a designer to produce such a magnificent thing like the world, but is not however proving that there is a God and that he was the designer of the world. ...read more.

Conclusion

Where as the Teleological Argument doesn't speak of the past or future but just simply says that the universe is designed in such a way that life evolved into existence. In conclusion, both arguments are different and may or may not convince an Atheist that there is a God. There are so many arguments, which develop over the years trying to prove there is an existing God but who's to say which one is right? Some may be more believable than others may but there are always two sides to every story. You could take the Teleological Argument for instance and say how can you compare something like a watch, which we know has a designer to something as huge as the universe. Just because something is complicated and fits like a watch, which was obviously thought through and designed by someone, doesn't prove that the same thing happened in the 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 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. Outline the Cosmological Argument for the existence of God.

    For example, when I die, the arrangement and form of the energy (matter) that makes me up will no longer exist, and so in one sense, I will not-exist. However the energy itself will still be in existence. If the first premise is found wrong, the whole argument will be useless.

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

    a good argument after all.28 The cosmological argument seems to be saying that there cannot be an infinite series of causes; that the buck, so to speak, stops somewhere. Aquinas, for example, says that there cannot be an infinite series of causes.29 They have also asked how can the cosmological argument avoid contradicting itself.

  1. Assess What Can Be Concluded From The Teleological Argument

    The apparent order and design present in these he argues cannot be purely down to 'chance.' This could potentially be applied on a larger scale to the world as a whole. There are combined conclusions: that the watch has a maker, and therefore the world (being far more complex)

  2. Explain the cosmological argument for existence of God

    There must be a first efficient cause, which is in itself uncaused. The focus of this argument is again on dependency, that everything depends upon something else to cause it. The difference between this argument and the first argument is that this argument is focused upon the things that causes

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

    Aristotle asks human beings to consider two statements, firstly " The universe has an ultimate cause" and secondly, " The universe has no ultimate cause" by showing that the latter appears to be an impossibility, he only leaves us with one option , being that there must be one ultimate

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

    The existence of the universe puzzles everyone, however the hypothesis and belief of God brings reason and an easily understandable answer to the most challenged question. If we question the director or the creator of our universe its easy enough to put the answer to the question, that god is the creator.

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

    A finite universe therefore needs a beginning, and a first cause, as things can't cause themselves. This first cause must be God. Ed Miller argued that an infinite universe would have an infinite number of days and that infinite number of days cannot be reached, so today would never arrive.

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

    He then proposes a notion that does not require a God or first mover and then reduces it to absurdity, as he goes on to say, conceive of a universe were everything was a secondary mover, which would result in an infinite regress of movers, and so if this were

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