Cosmological Argument

What Type of Argument is the Cosmological Arguement

It is a posteriori and inductive, so it is based on observations

Aquinas’ Third Way

• Everything we see in the universe is contigent but we can’t have a world where everything is contingent, beacuse then by definition, it could easily never have never exisisted.

• from this observation, Aquinas conluded that something must exist necessarily.

• Aquinas also makes the point that if there was a time nothing existed, then nothing would still exist, and therefore something must of caused the existence of something

Cristicisms from Hume and Russell

Criticism 1- The Third Way commits Fallacy of Compostion

Criticism 2- Necessary Beings are Meaningless

Criticism 3- The Universe itself may exist necessarily

Criticism 4- Universe may just be a Brute Fact

Criticism 1- The Third Way commits Fallacy of Compostion

Fallacy- A fallacy is a failure in reasoning that makes an argument invalid.

Fallacy of composition- This is the logical error of assuming that what is true for a part of something must also be true for the whole.

• The third way commits this since individual things in the universe are contingent, then the universe as a whole must also be contingent. This is like saying that every brick in a wall is small, so the wall also must be small, which is a faulty inference.

Criticism 2- Necessary Beings are Meaningless

write later

Criticism 3- The Universe itself may exist necessarily

the universe itself could be necessarily existent. If the universe has always existed without depending on anything else, then Aquinas’ argument for a necessary being beyond the universe is unnecessary.

Criticism 4- Universe may just be a Brute Fact

Russell says that the simplest explantion of why the universe exist is that there is no explantion and the universe is an unexplainable brute fact

Strengths

• Provides an Explanation for Existence – The argument accounts for why contingent beings exist rather than nothing.

• Based on Empirical Observation – Aquinas’ argument is a posteriori, drawing from observable reality where things come into and go out of existence, making it an accessible and logical explanation.

• Avoids the Problem of Infinite Regress – The argument asserts that an infinite series of contingent beings cannot explain existence, leading to the necessity of a being that exists by its own nature (i.e., a necessary being).

• Supports Classical Theism – The argument aligns with traditional monotheistic conceptions of God as a necessary, self-existent being, reinforcing the idea of divine necessity in religious thought.