Cosmological Arguments

Arguments from Causation

• Kalām Argument

• Aquinas’ First & Second Way

• Descartes’ Argument

Arguments from Contingency

• Aquinas’ Third Way

• Leibniz’s Principle of Sufficient Reason

Evaluation of Kalām Argument

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

• Fails to properly consider the possibility of an infinite series

• Hume’s criticism that it relies on the Causal Principle

Aquinas’ First Way Leibniz’s Principle- Argument from Motion

About things being acted on and being changed (passive)

P1 Things change (are in motion) in the world

P2 Motion moves from a potential state to an actual state (a cold radiator could be hotter → a radiator that’s now hot)

P3 This move from potential to actual. An only be caused by something in that actual state ( a hot boiler)

P4 Nothing can cause itself to change, so everything is caused to move by something else

P5 This change of motion can’t go back infinitely, otherwise there would have been nothing to start the chain, and hence no chain

P6 But there clearly is a chain. There must have been a ‘first mover’ that started this chain of motion

C This Unmoved Mover is God

Aquinas’ Second Way from Causation

About things acting and bringing about change (active)

P1 Causal Principle, every event has a cause

P2 Nothing can be the cause of itself (it would have to be prior to itself which is impossible)

P3 This order of efficient causes cannot go back infinitely, otherwise there would be no first cause and no subsequent causes

C1 There must be a first efficient cause which is not itself caused

C2 The first cause is God

Aquinas’ Third Way - From Contingency

P1 Things in the world are contingent

P2 If everything was contingent, then it’s possible there was a time when everything had passed out of existence, there was nothing

P3 If once there was nothing, then there would be nothing now, which is false

C1 Therefore not everything is contingent - there is one being which is necessary

C2 This necessary being is God

Descartes’ Argument based on his continuing existence

P1 The cause of my existence as a thinking thing could be: a) myself b) I’ve always existed c) my parents d) a being less than God or e) God

P2 I cannot have caused myself to exist for then I would have created myself perfect

P3 Neither have I always existed for then I would be aware of this

P4 My parents may be the cause of my physical existence, but not of me as a thinking mind - nor so they sustain me each moment

P5 I cannot be created by a being less than God, as I have the idea of God inside me and there must be as much reality in the cause as in the effect

C By elimination, only God could have created me