Studied by 3 people
Leibniz- Cosmological argument
Principle of sufficient reason, nothing is the reason for its own existence
Copleston- Cosmological argument
"A chain of contingent beings does not cause a necessary being", agrees with Aquinas' 3rd way (Contingency)
Mackie- Cosmological argument
Rejects infinite regress, train cart analogy- contingent beings are like an infinite number of train carts, God is the engine getting the vehicle to move
Russel- Cosmological argument
The existence of the universe is just a "brute fact"-there is no need to explore it further
Hume- Cosmological argument
The prime mover could be something other than the God of classical theism
Aristotle- Cosmological argument
Reducto ad absurdum to denounce infinite regress, it has no beginning and goes back infinitely and yet we are experiencing now and nothing caused the chain so if nothing caused it there would be no chain
Mill- Teleological argument
Critique, if we look at the rules and laws of the world and nature there is suffering and violence, natural disasters cause suffering and death therefore, this suffering proves that God didn't design the world or he is a flawed designer which undermines him
Darwin- Teleological argument
Critique, theory of evolution, God did not design the world, there is proof of living things evolving overtime
Dawkins- Teleological argument
Critique, even if God did make the world there is suffering and evil which implies that God didn't make the world properly
Paley- Teleological argument
Watchmaker theory, a watch is very intricate so much so that it must have a creator/designer this is like the world it is so complex it can not have just come about by chance must have been designed by God. Similarly the human eye is so complex it must have been designed,
Hume- Teleological argument
Link to watchmaker theory, HOWEVER, The world does not work like a watch it is more like a cabbage which grows and evolves as time goes on. Also says how does evil exist on a world that God designed- flawed designer.
Aquinas- Teleological argument
Archer and arrow analogy, the arrow is given a telos by the archer. Argues that everything has a telos which was given to it by God e.g. a ladybirds wings have a telos or purpose to help it fly.
Anselm- Ontological argument
"Than which nothing greater can be conceived", even athiests have a definition of God even if just to dismiss his existence. It is incoherant to think that God exists in the mind alone.
Gaunilo- Ontological argument
Perfect Island you can think of the most perfect island but just because it is the most perfect thing does not mean it exists outside of our mind, he is reducing Anselsm's argument using reducto ad adsurdum. Anselm criticises this saying he is applying his argument to a contingent thing when his argument only applies to necessary things.
Descartes- Ontological argument
Assumes existence is a predicate like Anselm.
God is a supremely perfect being 2)Existence is a supreme perfection 3)Therefore, God, a supremely perfect being, exists
Kant- Ontological argument
1st objection- a priori reasoning cannot establish existence, adding existence to a concept does not actualise something, 2nd objection- existence is not a predicate
Hume- Ontological argument
Whatever we can conceive of existing we can conceive of not existing. There is no being we cannot conceive to exist so no being can exist necessarily.
Note
Flashcard