0
The basic Platonic/Aristotelian cosmological argument is this:
- Every finite and contingent being has a cause.
- A causal loop cannot exist.
- A causal chain cannot be of infinite length.
- Therefore, a First Cause (or something that is not an effect) must exist. God is then often inserted as this "First Cause".
The newer more often quoted Kalam cosmological argument is this:
- (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 Kalam cosmological argument is the one most often used in contemporary debate by apologists such as Dr. William Lane Craig.
The cosmological argument is a philosophical argument for the existence of God based on the belief that the universe had a beginning and must have had a cause. It posits that something outside the universe must have initiated its existence. Different versions of the argument have been proposed throughout history by philosophers such as Thomas Aquinas and William Lane Craig.
The cosmological proof for the existence of God, states that since nothing causes itself and everything has a cause, therefore there must be some first cause which started it all. The first cause is God. Knowledgeable people often avoid invoking this proof, since some listeners will retort "Then what caused God?"
These listeners are unaware that since God is the only thing possessing intrinsic existence, He is not subject to causality.
There are a good number of more convincing arguments for God's existence.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What is the difference between the cosmological theory and the cosmological argument?
The cosmological theory is a scientific explanation for the origins and evolution of the universe, while the cosmological argument is a philosophical argument for the existence of God based on the principle that everything that exists must have a cause.
What is another word for cosmological?
astronomical
What is cosmological theory?
A theory of the origin and formation of the universe (the cosmos).
Einstein used the cosmological constant in his general relativity equations to do what?
Einstein used approximation methods in working out initial predictions of the theory. Einstein later declared the cosmological constant the biggest blunder of his life.
How long is a cosmological decade?
A cosmological decade represents a factor of 10 difference in time scale. In terms of years, one cosmological decade is 10 times the previous decade. So, for example, if one decade is 10 years, the next would be 100 years, then 1,000 years, and so on.
When was The KalΔm Cosmological Argument created?
The Kalām Cosmological Argument was created in 1979.
How many pages does The KalΔm Cosmological Argument have?
The Kalām Cosmological Argument has 216 pages.
Is the big bang theory a strong challenge to the cosmological argument?
The Big Bang theory can be seen as supporting the cosmological argument, which seeks to explain the origin of the universe. Some proponents of the cosmological argument point to the Big Bang as evidence of a finite beginning to the universe, which aligns with the argument for a first cause. However, the relationship between the Big Bang theory and the cosmological argument is complex and subject to different interpretations.
What are facts about the cosmological argument?
The cosmological argument is a type of argument for the existence of God based on the idea that the universe must have a cause that originated it. It asserts that everything that begins to exist must have a cause, and since the universe began to exist, it must also have a cause. This argument has been debated for centuries by philosophers and theologians.
Is the cosmological argument valid?
The cosmological argument is a metaphysical argument for the existence of a first cause or necessary being that initiated the existence of the universe. Its validity depends on one's philosophical perspective and interpretation of causality and existence. Some find it compelling, while others criticize its assumptions and conclusions.
Who was one of the main proponents of the cosmological argument?
Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas. For additional supporters of this argument, check the corresponding Wikipedia article.
Who rejected the cosmological argument?
Many philosophers and thinkers have rejected the cosmological argument, including David Hume, Bertrand Russell, and J.L. Mackie. They have raised objections related to the assumptions of causality, the principle of sufficient reason, and the existence of an uncaused cause.
What is the difference between the cosmological theory and the cosmological argument?
The cosmological theory is a scientific explanation for the origins and evolution of the universe, while the cosmological argument is a philosophical argument for the existence of God based on the principle that everything that exists must have a cause.
Why did hume reject the cosmological argument?
Hume rejected the cosmological argument because he believed that it relied on the assumption of a necessary being, which cannot be proven to exist. He also argued that there is no logical reason to assume that the universe must have a cause or explanation beyond itself.
What does the cosmological argument teach us about God?
It teaches that God has no beginning because he as always been there
What are the criticisms of cosmological argument?
Critics of the cosmological argument often argue that it does not necessarily point to the existence of a specific god or deity, and that it relies on the assumption that everything must have a cause without explaining what caused the initial cause. They also argue that the argument may not provide definitive proof of a god's existence and that it is based on premises that are not universally accepted.
What are the limitations of the cosmological argument?
A:The cosmological argument for the existence of God states that every finite and contingent thing has a cause, but that causes can not go back in an infinite chain, so there must be a First Cause. There are many limitations and problems with this argument. The cosmological argument is no more than a poorly constructed premise that can mean what you want it to mean.The sometimes response, "Who made God?" may be simplistic, but it does highlight the question of why there is a noncontingent First Cause.An even greater problem for Christians, Muslims and Jews, is that if the cosmological argument were valid, it would equally prove the existence of Brahma, Ahura Mazda or any other creator god.For a scientist, the First Cause can quite validly be the Big Bang. Most scientists at least argue that "God" is not a scientifically proven causeThe cosmological argument can even be restated so as to prove that God need not exist:Whatever begins to exist has a cause.The Universe began to exist.Therefore, the Universe had a cause.
