Philosophy of Religion: 1:2: Cosmological argument

3 of Aquinas’ 5 ways relevant to Cosmological argument

• Motion

• Causation

• Contingency

Argument from Motion (Aquinas)

Nothing in the world moves without being moved by something else, since infinite regress is illogical something must be an Unmoved Mover (God)

Argument from Causation (Aquinas)

Everything has a cause. Since infinite regress is illogical, something must have caused it all without being caused. Ergo, God.

Argument from Contingency (Aquinas)

Everything can either been necessary or contingent. However there must be at least one non-contingent (necessary) being in the world, to cause everything else. Ergo, God.

Descartes’ Cosmological argument

Narrowed down causes of his own existence:

• Can’t have caused himself because he’d make himself perfect

• Can’t have always existed or he’d know

• Can’t be my parents because they don’t sustain my existence

Only answer is God.

Leibniz sufficient reason argument

• Said there were two truths: truths of reason and truths of fact

• Truths of reason: Don’t require further analysis, just true. 3+3=6

• Truths of fact: Require explanation as to why they are true, and these explanations can go on forever. To avoid this infinite regress, God is the explanation.

What is a recurring issue with cosmological arguments?

There is no provable inherent need for a ‘first cause’ beyond our understanding of sense/logic, which we already know we can’t apply. Essentially there is no evidence we actually can’t have infinite regress so any argument based on that isn’t valid.

What is Hume’s Fork?

Hume objects to causation is not everything must have a cause and uses Hume’s Fork to do it:

• Ideas do not always have causes, you can picture a chair without any cause at all

• We cannot prove a lot of the time causation- correlation doesn’t mean causation

What was Russel’s ‘Fallacy of Composition’?

Just because the parts making up the whole have one characteristic doesn’t mean the collective whole will. Many sheets of paper are thin but combined in a book, the book will be thick.
So just because everything in the universe has a cause doesn’t mean what makes the universe does.

What is a criticism of almost all ‘first cause’ arguments?

No proof given the first cause is God. Even if there must be a first cause.

Outline the Kalam argument.

• Whatever begins to exist has a cause

• The universe began to exist

• Therefore, the universe has a cause

Outlined originally by 11th century Islamic scholars and expanded on by William Craig who ties it to “a personal creator”

What is Hilbert’s Infinite Hotel?

A paradox showing how infinity works. Even if all rooms are occupied guests can be fitted in. By for example moving all existing guests to twice their room number and putting new guests in the old rooms.
The statement ‘all the rooms are full’ does not mean new guests can’t arrive. Infinity can be stretched or squashed.

How did Craig claim infinity is impossible?

Craig rejects that infinity could exist in reality. For example, if half of infinity skittles were red, half of infinity is still infinity, so infinity skittles would be red, so all of them, which doesn’t make sense.

Outline infinite regress as a counter for Craig.

Infinite regress explains the origins of the universe while abiding by most of the arguments for God’s existence, as there needn’t be an origin or a first cause at all. Hume advocates we lack evidence to judge and so infinite regress is entirely possible.