• 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...


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.


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.


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".

    He is a 'different breed of dog' from his siblings, as his father says: "it's some that can live their whole life out without asking about it, and it's others has to know why it is, and this boy is one of the latters. He's going to be into everything".

  2. The Strengths and Weaknesses of the Cosmological Argument

    and that the universe started by random movement of particles and by the Big Bang. The theory provides a scientific explanation to the beginning of the universe and can be used in favor of or against the cosmological argument. Was the Big Bang caused by a spontaneous random event, or by a deliberate action by God?

  1. Critique of Aquinas's cosmological argument - 3rd way(Contingency)

    Thus there is no need for a necessary being. Therefore if the universe is infinite, it reinforces the idea that matter is eternal and that the universe is in fact not contingent as Aquinas suggested. However, a criticism of the proposed argument stems from the principle of sufficient reason.

  2. Explain the Ontological argument.

    the lack of weeds, the organisation of the plants and flowers, so to does the universe suggest order due to the order and regularity in the universe such as the rotation of the planets and natural laws. Philosophers conclude that this is not merely a result of random chance.

  1. The Teleological Argument.

    Why is it that when we look out of the window we see so many colourful and things such as flowers and colour and have happy feelings? Science has stated that human beings see/perceive colour like no other race. The design of our eyes and the ability to register different

  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. 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.

  2. 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

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