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

Is the Cosmological Argument a good argument?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Is the Cosmological Argument a good argument? The cosmological argument is the way Thomas Aquinas proved the existence of God. He said that everything that is was caused by something before it. He also said that common sense shows that no object can create itself; some previous object would have had to create it. Aquinas believed that this string of cause and effect could not have gone on forever, and that there must be a First Cause, much like dominoes. But, the only problem with this was that this First Cause would have had to be uncaused, and therefore, is God, as God is uncaused. There are some strengths in this case, which sways people to believe in this argument. ...read more.

Middle

Another weakness is the fact that if God is self-explanatory, then the universe could also be self-explanatory. If it is possible for God to be a brute face, then it is also possible for the universe to just 'be'. There are many philosophers who have said that the universe just exists, or that the universe created itself, and Aquinas said that God just exists or that God created itself (depending on the interpretation), so couldn't it be possible for Aquinas's God and the universe to be one and the same? This argument technically states that 'something' created the universe, but that does not necessarily mean the God theists believe in created the world. ...read more.

Conclusion

Also, Aquinas exhibited a giant leap of faith when he said that God created the world, when all he technically proved was that 'something' created the world. I do not agree with this because, to make me believe in this argument, I need hard facts, not leaps of faith. Even though I acknowledge the fact that there are some aspects of this argument that are true and do have hard evidence, such as the fact that everything was caused by something else, I can also see that I would need more evidence to put my faith fully into what Thomas Aquinas said. Therefore, in answer to the question originally posed at the beginning of this essay, I do not believe this argument is a good argument as it is contradictory, it has most of its proof in faith than fact, and it was not made with an open mind. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Existence of God 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 GCSE Existence of God essays

  1. Deconstructing O'Connor's "A Good Man Is Hard to Find".

    Her eagerness to be in everything is simply an act of jotting down 'the mileage on the car at 55890' or an attempt to create a whole universe behind the visual phenomena 'wishing she were [telling the truth]'. It is noteworthy that she is the one who has named the

  2. Explain the Ontological argument.

    However supporters of the argument, state that God is unique and therefore the rules of the contingent universe do not apply to him. Kenny stated that Aquinas principle that nothing moves itself ignores the fact that humans and animals move themselves.

  1. The Teleological Argument.

    If you look at any object e.g. a chair, it bears no resemblance to the person who made it. Although it is said in the bible that God made us in 'his own likeness' this does not mean that we are carbon copies of him.

  2. The Cosmological Argument

    Thus the fire is the cause of the motion of burning. This type of chain of cause and effect stretches back to a first example of motion, without a first mover we would have no movement now as movement always come from something. The second way is based on cause.

  1. The Strengths and Weaknesses of the Cosmological Argument

    This makes sense as an event only occurs if earlier events have taken place as in the example of fire and wood. Aquinas concludes that the first movement was brought about by a first mover and therefore this was God.

  2. Ontological Argument

    As God is the supreme and greatest thought ever thought, then it is not logical to believe that he does not exist as this would mean that there would something in the universe greater than God (the first thought). Therefore everything which exists in reality will always be better then something which exists in our mind e.g.

  1. Cosmological argument

    This first cause started this resulting chain of causes and this Uncaused Cause was God. One could argue that the universe needn't have a beginning. David Hume states this brute fact by declaring that the universe is eternal. He goes on to say that if the universe did begin, it

  2. The Cosmological Argument

    It is also believed that Aristotle thought the Prime mover was not religious, as it takes no interest of what goes on in the world. In my opinion, Aristotle raises a valid point in the first mover argument. It does not seem logical that the universe was just a coincidence.

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