The Cosmological Argument

Aquinas’s Cosmological Argument

• Cosmological Argument is ‘a posteriori’

• Attempts to prove the existence of God

• There are three Cosmological Arguments

• ‘Unmoved Mover’, ‘Uncaused Cause’ and ‘Possibility and Necessity’

Aquinas’s Cosmological Argument

• The Cosmological Argument begins with the simple fact that the Universe exists

• The fact that the Universe exists means that existence needs an explanation

• We know that everything that exists needs a cause therefore the universe needs a cause

• Similarly the human race exists so what is it’s cause?

Aquinas’s Cosmological Argument

• Contingency is the belief that things were caused by something else

• If contingency is to be believed then the universe must have been caused by something else

Aristotle’s Reductio Ad Absurdum

• Aristotle puts forward two competing claims that either the universe has an ultimate cause or it does not

• Aristotle proves that the second claim that the universe doesn’t have an ultimate cause is impossible by saying that every cause has an effect and that every effect has a cause

• If there was no ultimate cause then nothing would of started the chain of cause and effect as nothing can come from nothing

Aquinas’s Unmoved Mover

• Everything that is moved is moved by something and that mover has been moved by something else

• This chain cannot go back forever or movement would of not started in the first place

• Therefore there must be an unmoved mover, which isn’t itself moved. This unmoved mover must be God

Aquinas’s Uncaused Cause

• Everything has a cause and every cause has a cause

• This chain cannot go back forever or the chain of cause and effect would not have started in the first place and therefore there must be an uncaused cause that isn’t itself caused. This uncaused cause must be God

Aquinas’s Possibility and Necessity

• Individual things come into existence and eventually cease to exist and therefore at one time none of them existed

• Something only comes into existence as a result of something that already exists and therefore there must be a being who has to exist, who is a necessary being. This being is God

Strengths of the Cosmological Argument

• The Cosmological Argument is logically strong as it seems to make sense that everything has a cause and that there must be a first cause which started this off

Schoolboy Objection to the Cosmological Argument

• The Schoolboy Objection says if every cause has a cause then who caused God?

• However, to ask what caused God is to misunderstand God as necessary. If God needs a cause, then God must be contingent but the point of the argument is that God is necessary

Can’t Universe be Necessary Objection

• Why can’t the Universe be necessary. If there are going to be exceptions to the rule then why is it God and not the Universe

• However, scientific evidence shows that the Universe is contingent through the big bang. So if the Universe is contingent then it cannot be necessary. Also we need an explanation for the Universe

Hume’s Objections to the Cosmological Argument

• Hume’s Objection is that even if there is a necessary being we cannot say what that being is like

• However, the Cosmological Argument does not try to tell us what God is like, only that he exists

Hume’s Other Objections to the Cosmological Argument • Hume claims that cause and effect are not

necessarily linked. Causes can have different effects and not necessarily one guaranteed effect. A cause could lead to a range of different effects which in turn could cause something else, cause and effect are not necessarily linked

• However, some things are directly caused by another thing which seems to suggest that Hume is incorrect