Cosmological arguements Flashcards
(9 cards)
what is a cosmological arguement
a deductive aprosteriori arguemnst fro the existence of God concerning causation, change, motion, contingency or finitude with respect to the universe as whole or the porcesses within it
Outline Aquinas first way as a cosmological aguement (5m)
Aquinas frist way ( amoung 5) is a cosmological arguemt from motion and so is a deductive aprosteriori arguemnst fro the existence of God concerning causation, change, motion, with respect to the universe as whole or the porcesses within it.INdividully teh firts way from motion does not argue for a God but simply a firts cause of change, together the five ways argue for God. The arguemnet is as follows:
P1)somethings in the wolrd undergo change
P2)whatever changes is moved by something other than itself
P3)If A is chnaged by B then B must also have been changed by something else
P4) If this goes on to infinit, then tehre is no firts mover and cause of change, to remove the firts mover is to remove any of the susequnt change that comes from it, so nothing changes
P5) this is not true there is change
C1) therefore there must be a first mover of change ( we call this firts mover God)
Aquinas talks of chnage in trems of an object moving from its potential to an actual, fro example a pan of water has the potential to biol, and once hetaed by a stove ( a mover to cause change) will the pot actualise its potential by boiling. The pan of water would not boil on its own and must be acted upon. Aquinas claims we should apply the same thought to the universe.
What is the difference between temporal and sustaining cuasation
Temporal causation brings about its effcts after its ( the effect follows the cause in time) and the efffect can continue aftre the cause causes ( my parents caused me but do not ave to be alive for me to continue) wheras sustaining causation brings abuot the effect continously ( rather than at a single point in time) and teh effct depends on the continued existence and operation of the cause. For eaxmple sitting on a chiar continuosly requires the chairs rigidity and gravity
Outline Aquinas secound way
Aquinas frist way ( amoung 5) is a cosmological arguemt from motion and so is a deductive aprosteriori arguemnst fro the existence of God concerning sustaining causation, with respect to the universe as whole or the porcesses within it. INdividully the first way from motion does not argue for a God but simply a first cause of change, together the five ways argue for God. The arguement is concerned with sustaining causation which is something that brings about a continued effect, the arguemnet is as follows:
1) we find in the world sustaining causes and effects
2) Nothing can be the sustaining cause of itself
3) Sustsianing causes follow in order: teh firts cause sustaings the second which causally sustains the third
4) if you remove the cause you remove its effect
5)therefore if there is no firts cuase( ie sustaining cause that does not causally depend on any other cause), there will be no other causes
6)if there is an inifnite regress of causes there is no first cause
C1) therfeore given that there are sustaining causes there cannoy be an infinite regress of causes
C2) therefore there must be a first uncaused caue, we call this being God
Outline lane Craigs kalam
it is a cosmlogical arguement for causation so is a deductive aprosteriori arguemnt for the existence of God from causation and finitude with respect to the universe as a whole and the porcesses within it
Lane craigs is concerned with temporal causation and idenified that there are only two ways someting can be caused, scietifically or personally. Ther arguemnt is as follows:
P1) everything began to exist has a cause
P2) the universe began to exist
C1) therefore the universe has a cause
lane Craig claims that everything that is caused scientifically must always have something else that caused it, and this would lead to an infinite regress which he thinks is impossible aswell as only things within the unievsre can be caused scientifically not the universe as a whole. Lane craig says that this then means there must have been a first cause which is personal, the personal cause is the christian God
Explain Descartes cosmological arguement
Descartes purposes a cosmological argument form causation. His argument is different from other cosmological arguments because it is apriori deductive argument for the existence of God from temporal and sustaining causation and concepts of finitude. Through his Cogito Descartes has established “ I think therefore I am” and claims that he rather caused himself, was caused by something else, or is uncaused. Descartes claims he did not cause himself because he would give himself all perfections, he is imperfect and so must not have caused himself. He is not uncaused because his life an thoughts consist of discrete moments that are independent where one moment entails his existence n the nec=xt moment. Therefore he is not uncaused. The final option is that he caused by something. This thing is itself self-caused, uncaused or caused by another thing. If it is caused by something else then this thing must also be uncaused or caused about something else. This continues to infinity. An infinite regress is not possible so there must be something which is uncaused this being is caused.
Outline Aquinas third way
- Things in the universe exist contingently.
- If it is possible for something not to exist, then at some time, it does not exist.
- If everything exists contingently, then it is possible that at some time, there was nothing
in existence. - If at some time, nothing was in existence, nothing could begin to exist.
- Since things do exist, there was never nothing in existence.
- Therefore, there is something that does not exist contingently, but must exist.
- This necessary being is God.
- God exists.
Outline Hume’s objection to Cosmological Arguments
from Infinity (3 marks)
Hume objects to the cosmological argument because it is not
analytic that actual infinities do not exist. So, just because we
cannot experience one does not make it false by necessity, it
could be the case that we just do not understand them or
there is one nobody has had experience of.
Explain Leibniz’ Cosmological Argument from the Principle of Sufficient Reason.
The world is made up of truths of reason, and truths of fact.
Truths of reason, such as maths, are the way they are because they cannot be otherwise, they are necessary. Truths of fact are contingent.
Contingent facts could be the opposite of the way that they are, so they require a sufficient reason for why they are the way that they are.
If we give a contingent explanation in the form of a further contingent fact, then that fact requires further explanation, and we can keep doing this infinitely without getting any closer to its sufficient reason.
Therefore, the sufficient reason of contingent facts lie in a necessary fact.
Thatthere are any contingent facts is itself a contingent fact, therefore there is a necessary reason all contingent facts.
There is a necessary being which is a sufficient reason for facts in the universe.
this necessary being is God.
This is a contingency arguement for God. The world is made up of truths of reason, and truths of fact.
Truths of reason, such as maths, are the way they are because they cannot be otherwise, they are necessary. Truths of fact are contingent.
Contingent facts could be the opposite of the way that they are, so they require a suff
