Proving God's existence

Question 1

what are arguments for gods existence based on?

Answer 1

observation (based on a posterior knowledge - uses sense experience)
- cosmological
- teleological

Question 2

what’s the cosmological argument?

Answer 2

based on some perceived knowledge of the universe such as cause and effect (aquinas supports Humes skeptic)
- aquinas uses observations about the universe and the natural laws within in to establish that it must have had a beginning (concerned with why it is here and why it continues)

Question 3

what’s the teleological argument?

Answer 3

based on the apparent order of the universe

Question 4

what is Aquinas’ cosmological argument based on?

Answer 4

his first three ways in his book Summa Theologica

Question 5

what’s the first way?

Answer 5

argument from motion (moving towards telos)
- aquinas argued that nothing can move/change on its own but there cannot be an infinite regress of mover so there must be an unmoved mover (can’t be moved) which started the chain if movement)
- he calles this unmoved mover God

Question 6

what’s an infinite regress?

Answer 6

a chain of events going backwards forever

Question 7

whats the second way?

Answer 7

argument from cause (actions are always a direct result of something else)
- everything in the universe is the result of a succession of uses as nothing can be its own cause (logical)
- there must be a first cause which itself is uncaused and began he chain of cause and effect
- so Aquinas called this uncaused caused God

Question 8

what’s the third way?

Answer 8

argument from contingency
- everything in the universe is contingent (it can either exist or not exist) so if things sometimes do not exist surely there must have ben a time where nothing existed, but as there if something now it must have came from something
- therefore there must have been a different type of being that brought things into existence,Aquinas claims this to be God

Question 9

issues with the third way?

Answer 9

• main issue is Aquinas’ assumptions that there was a time when there was nothing, there is no reason to assume that there needs to be such a time
• another issue raised by philosophers (incl Bertand Russell) is wether it makes sense to speak of a necessary being, as can a thing be necessary

Question 10

what’s Leibniz’s principle of sufficient reason (support for the cosmoligal argument) ?

Answer 10

idea that the universe is a harmonious whole which god created for a particular reason as the best of all possible worlds, the world is too well crated to not have a reason behind it
Leibniz refers to this as ‘principle of sufficient reason’ - the idea that everything in the world has a reason

Question 11

support for the cosmological argument?

Answer 11

• we can observe motion and change in the universe so there has to be a series of mover but it cannot go back to infinity (logical)
• from observations we can infer that there must be a first mover
• humans have always wondered about their purpose

Question 12

arguments against the cosmoligcal argument?

Answer 12

• just as reasonable to assume that there could be an infinite regress of movers than an unmoved mover who started the chain
• the jump to the idea of god is another assumption,could there not be a different type of god who made his creations than had no further involvement ?
• existentialist would argue that asking why the universe exists is an unanswerable question so we shouldn’t even bother asking it

Question 13

David Hume on the cosmological argument?

Answer 13

• claims that inductive reasoning (using mind) which collects data from observations can only lead to a probable rather than a completely certain conclusion eg we cannot be certain the sun will rise tomorrow but we assume it will
• so Hume argues that although we observe cause and effect in some parts of nature it does not mean we can extend this principle to everything in the universe having a cause (this is making a leap)
• world doesn’t need a cause
• points out the logical fallacy using the fallacy of composition (assume just cause parts of universe have cause everything does)
• why would god not have a cause, could the universe not be its own cause
• epicurea thesis that in an infinite amount of time with an infinite amount of possibilities the universe would have came into existence

Question 14

counter argument to Hume?

Answer 14

• Anscombe argues that as human we always ask why so what is the cause of the universe is a valid question
• humes assumptions that infinite regress is possible is just was impossible to verify as infinite regress being possible (neither can be proved)
• we collect observations from the past to make predictions about the future (this is how we live)

Question 15

Copleston vs Russell?

Answer 15

Russell (non beliver) said there was no reason for the universes existence and it was therefore pointless trying to find a reason for it (is that an un philosphical approach)
Russell says that ‘every man who exists has a mother and it seems to me your argument is that therefore the human race must have a mother; but obviously the human races hasn’t a mother’

Question 16

what is the teleological argument often referred to?

Answer 16

the design element as if things have a purpose it suggests that a designer has designed an object with that purpose in mind

Question 17

where do Aquinas set out the design element?

Answer 17

set out as the fifth way in his book the Summa Theologica

Question 18

Aquinas quotation for the teleological argument?

Answer 18

‘it is plain not fortuitously ,but designedly, do they achieve their end’

Question 19

what analogy does Aquinas use to explain the teleological argument?

Answer 19

the archer analogy,an arrow needs an archer to reach its bulls eye (telos) similarly we need something to help us reach our telos

Question 20

evidence for analogy?

Answer 20

there are examples of non-thinking beings in nature that act to achieve a purpose

Question 21

from William Paley?

Answer 21

a well known supporter of Aquinas’ fifth way who uses the analogy of a pocket watch to suggest that purpose must indicate design and a designer - the watch has been carefully constructed by the watchmaker for the purpose of telling the time.
Paley says that if you found a watch on the floor you would know there had been a watchmaker that had designed it for a purpose as you would not assume it had appeared out of no where therefore why would the universe have just appeared out of nowhere

Question 22

arguments against Paley?

Answer 22

what if the watch was broken or unreliable in telling the time?
Paley would say that it would be clear that the watch has a purpose even if it did not fulfil that purpose perfectly (this can be used against the objection of natural disasters in the world which indicate poor design or no designer
- but this may lead to further questions about the attributes of the designer wether it is possible to jump from observations of the world to a divine disaster

Question 23

F.R Tennant and the anthropic principle ?

Answer 23

• Tennant developed the anthropic principle that argues the world is so exactly right to create the precise environment from man to evolve that it must surely have been planned
• but consider the huge space of the universe with the majority being bleak, cold and barren the chance that somewhere something odd happens are much improved,tennats view seems to assume that the entire universe exists fro the sake of this little earth