Criticisms of the cosmological argument essay

It follows that the library contains as many red books as the total books in its collection, and as many red books as black books, and as many red books as red and black books combined. That a thing should cause itself is impossible: Why is there something, no matter what it is, even if different or even radically different from what currently exists?

Such a train would move if it were infinite. Hume had developed a theory of causation that was based on our epistemological limits as human beings — to talk about the origin of the universe is to go beyond the scope of human understanding and observation, as it is impossibly remote and unavailable to us.

The German philosopher Gottfried Leibniz made a similar argument with his principle of sufficient reason in It is true that a carpenter would not, in a finite time-span, succeed in driving in a nail if he had to carry out an infinite number of movements. Supplementary arguments are required to show that the first cause must have the attributes assigned to the deity.

In fieri is generally translated as "becoming", while in esse is generally translated as "in essence". This formulation of the causal argument unquestionably circumvents one of the objections mentioned previously. If the series, however, were infinite this would not be the case.

Cosmological Argument

Defenders of the argument respond that there is a key similarity between the universe and the experienced content, namely, both Criticisms of the cosmological argument essay players and the like and the cosmos are contingent.

In that case he would succeed in driving in the nail even if he required an infinite number of movements for this purpose. He argued that the fact of existence could not be inferred from or accounted for by the essence of existing things, and that form and matter by themselves could not originate and interact with the movement of the Universe or the progressive actualization of existing things.

It may be granted that the air around us is a cause in esse of human life and further that certain gravitational forces are among the causes in esse of the air being where it is.

Therefore, the series has not a phenomenal cause, but a transcendent cause We may suppose the carpenter to have broken an infinite number of hammers, and as often to have replaced the broken tool by a fresh one. What causes or explains the existence of this contingent being must either be solely other contingent beings or include a non-contingent necessary being.

But if there is question of causes on which the work is not essentially dependent, we cannot draw the same conclusion. Islamic philosophy enriches the tradition, developing two types of arguments.

Explain Hume’s criticisms of the cosmological argument

To say that the series is infinite implies 2but it does not imply 1. Thus, Smith argues that Craig begs the question by wrongly presuming that an intuitive relationship holds between finite sets and their proper subsets, namely, that a set has more members than its proper subsets must hold even in the case of infinite sets Smith, in Craig and Smith He constructed his cosmological arguments around the question of what sustains things in the universe in their existence.

But if infinites are actual, a library with an infinite number of books would not be reduced in size at all by removal of a specific number of books short of all of themfor example, all the red books or those with even catalogue numbers Craig and Smith Let us assume that we have now explained in the case of each of the five Eskimos why he or she is in New York.

Explain Hume’s criticisms of the cosmological argument

In terms of mathematics, infinite regress is entirely possible as it is always possible to increase or decrease a number.

The illustrations given by Joyce and Phillips are hardly to the point. Again, a liquid receives its shape from the vessel in which it is contained; but were the pressure of the containing sides withdrawn, it would not retain its form for an instant. However, this criticism could be weakened by arguing that Kant is just rehashing his criticism of the Ontological differences despite the obvious differences in the Ontological and Cosmological Arguments Ontological Argument is a priori, Cosmological argument is a posteriori.

A complete explanation of the occurrence of E is a full explanation of its occurrence in which all the factors cited are such that there is no [further] explanation either full or partial of their existence of operation in terms of factors operative at the time of their existence or operation.

It is necessary to add a few words about the proper way of formulating the position of those who reject the main premise of the cosmological argument, in either of the forms we have considered.In this essay I shall describe Anselm's ontological argument and look at how it may prove Gods existence.

I will then go on to look at criticisms of the argument. Hume’s criticisms of the cosmological argument are found in his book Dialogues on Natural Religion. In them Philo, Demea and Cleanthes discuss arguments for the existence of God.

Hume was a sceptic and therefore doubtful about the claims of religion. David Hume’s Criticisms of the Cosmological Argument. The essence of the cosmological argument that “Nothing can come from nothing” (Ex nihilo, nihil fit) is founded on two major principles of causal reasoning which can be found in Aquinas’ Cosmological arguments (the first three ways) as well as Copleston’s version of the argument.

The five ways are: argument for an unmoved mover, argument for an uncaused causer, argument from contingency, argument from gradation and argument from teleology.

It is the first three that support the cosmological argument to explain the existence of God. The cosmological argument is less a particular argument than an argument type. It uses a general pattern of argumentation (logos) that makes an inference from particular alleged facts about the universe (cosmos) to the existence of a unique being, generally identified with or referred to as God.

In natural theology and philosophy, a cosmological argument is an argument in which the existence of a unique being, generally seen as some kind of god, is deduced or inferred from facts or alleged facts concerning causation, change, motion, contingency, or finitude in respect of the universe as a whole or processes within it.

Criticisms of the cosmological argument essay
Rated 5/5 based on 82 review