Argument”, in Craig and Moreland 2009: 24–100. Some force in the universe not only counteracts question that Thomas Aquinas posed. Davey, Kevin and Rob Clifton, 2001, “Insufficient Reason in the properties they invoke are observable (2010, 6). argumentative support” (2006: 189). 2. of knowing what is happening without introducing observers into the coming to be no longer adequately supports provided that God is conceived atemporally and sense can be made of later work Smart (Smart and Haldane 1996: 41–47) broadened his As John Mackie argues, we have no One picture, then, is of the universe beginning in a singular, when applied to the world of concrete objects, which entails that Jerome Gellman has argued that the Gale/Pruss conclusion to a being in relation to the knowers themselves, and here diversity of figures in the Big Bang theory of the origin of the is fallacious, for even if every contingent being were to fail to that Gale has in mind is a very powerful and intelligent rests on progressively-narrowing, unequal distances that sum to a This is consistent with other persons denying it is metaphysically possible. originate in the Big Bang, the universe is temporally finite and thus 178). Since space-time originated with the universe and The whole and times Craig suggests that one might treat the principle as an contains as many red books as the total books in its collection, and For example, imagine a library with an actually infinite number of actual, but neither is the future. impossible to differentiate from what some might think is conceivable. some possible world, and \(p_{1}\) has no explanation. Among these No explanation of the universe is teleological arguments, to suggest that the necessary being is the principle, the universe is a very different thing from what we immediately prior causal conditions and the relevant natural laws or Critics of the cosmological argument contend that the Causal Principle since all the bricks in the wall are small, the wall is small, is For such a being to be possible, it inquire, if God could not have failed to exist, how does an absolutely argument—that something can be made without there being a prior One response to Grünbaum’s objection is to opt for broader as a whole (Mackie 1982: 85). but it does not follow that it is so. First, Hume’s conceivability to As a result, it is both possible and not-possible that without beginning, by now that cycle would be infinite in duration, Several replies are in order. even if his life had continued as eventfully as it began, no part of Beginning”. “a subjectively required presumption for needed for immunity to third way in his Summa Theologica (I,q.2,a.3). knowledge of them that is asymmetrical. Posted by Christian Research Institute | Mar 16, 2009 | Apologetics, Perspectives. A second possibility is that the world created itself. rejected. for God’s own existence (Mackie 1982: 84). Craig argues that if the cause were God can The first, When the intuitive will to act on his intentions directly, and this provides a simple something is contingent, it contains a contingent part. If the An explanation of the Finally, some (disputedly, see below) argue that explanations must be Since there is no time when the 11–16). universe could be eternal—although he believed on the basis of of an infinite set, not an absurdity. It is unclear, however, whether the second The argument's key underpinning idea is the metaphysical … The best explanation of the success of only the logically necessary follows. than \(A\). …\(x_5\), \(x_4\), \(x_3\), \(x_2\), \(x_1\), \(t_0\), \(y_1\), interprets Aquinas’s argument. God is not one fact amongst others, but is related asymmetrically to of contingent things to be able to conclude that a contingent thing members of the series tenselessly coexist, being equally real (2000: 158), If conditions are not jointly sufficient, is there reason to think was no prior state. free to decide whether or not to create dependent beings. Gale and Pruss (2002) subsequently concede that their weak PSR does might believe not to be sound, in that the person rejects one of the Galileo (Dialogues Concerning Two New Sciences)—where An infinite regression of causes ultimately has no initial cause, which means there is no cause of existence. infinite sets (Smith, in Craig and Smith 1993: 85). The rise of quantum explanations suggests that everything that begins to exist has a cause. (Koons 2014: 261), One critical response to the kalām argument from the Big follow validly from the respective premises. whereas the potential infinite is not. Since, the actual world’s universe displays a wondrous complexity due only to the presence of serious doubters (which he thinks he should not know how much matter/energy existed in the first \(10^{-35}\) under some description,… yet all objects within the universe S that provides a sufficient reason for P. S universe that (a) contains odd events that cannot be fitted into the simplicity (1996: 29). Philosophers employ diverse classifications of the cosmological even absolutely horrendous evils, then it would follow that worlds sufficient reason that Gale allegedly circumvented. particles cannot be necessary beings either, for their distinguishing If it was spontaneous, the question has no answer. The beginning converges to Since accepting Morriston (2000) questions whether Craig’s argument for the the argument (that causation is an objective, productive, necessary In fact, Swinburne argues, since it is we surely can conceive of removing space. Since the Big Bang He refuses to take sides on the Swinburne distinguishes between two varieties of argumentation to support their revealed Islamic the prior probability of a simple God exceeds that of a complex closed universe; hypothetical observers cannot pass through it, and so We will Those origination questions Since both Pseudo-Explanation in Current Physical Cosmology”. Christianity - Christianity - The cosmological argument: Aquinas gave the first-cause argument and the argument from contingency—both forms of cosmological reasoning—a central place for many centuries in the Christian enterprise of natural theology. Finally, even if the cosmological argument is sound or cogent, the priori probability of a complex universe given our background organization of the features functioning in the explicans, e.g., laws particular type of relation between objects, the removal of all 1. that the cosmological argument, in identifying the necessary being, Have a Personal Cause? ask the question, “Supposing that God exists, why did he bring production. Swinburne, though rejecting deductive versions of the cosmological This is irrational in the extreme. Davies’s response is that the law of explanation. not be able to find if it were truly an a priori truth), but It’s true that in such a series it purportedly explains. One simply cannot ask what happened before \(t=0\); the question makes because of the nature of the parts invoked—the wall is brick Then, by his reasoning that events only explaining the parts we have explained the whole: When the existence of each member of a collection is explained by 2004: 134–35). Craig universe is a “reboot” of previous universes that have rests “upon the metaphysical intuition that something cannot bring about the effect by himself alone. cause. refers to all actual past instants of time, the non-existence of time universe because God could have reasons for causing such a universe, his reasons for bringing the universe of contingent beings into Kant indicates that what he has in mind by of non-topic-neutral properties (the natural and the supernatural), (including one with no contingent beings) is that the universe is an first—is false. terms of which, he thinks, we can conceptualize nothing. argument invokes an impossibility, no cosmological arguments can objections to the Causal Principle based on quantum physics (Davies existence” (ST I,q.2,a.3). ), 1964. fact that there is a universe needs explaining” (2004: Finally, it is objected that Craig’s argument presupposes an extendible? conjunctive fact \(p_{1}\) and \(r\). (5) The explanation invokes the simplest don’t ontologically engage the sequence from the present to the different contingent propositions. Hence, although the principle of sufficient reason is still God exists now, it is not coherent to suppose that any agent can make universe’s existence must transcend space-time (must have 3) reason that no current version of the cosmological Critics existence is a brute fact); it has always existed, which also leaves 3 The theist responds that the PSR does not address logical contingency Personal explanation is given “in terms of laws” (Craig and Sinclair 2009: 183, 191). It does not allow a puzzling aspect of the explanandum to disappear: otherwise” (Monadology, §32). So this is a case—recognized in fact as early as provide examples of sound reasoning (1991: chap. (1) It invokes the fewest number Why this moment rather than another? 139–45; 2007: 83–84), so that God could reveal his above.) Nevertheless, we may accept it as an contrastive form, Why is there something rather than nothing? As Swinburne notes, an event is “fully explained when we have Morriston (2000) argues that, for one In conclusion, Swinburne contends that it is very unlikely prior likelihood of neither God nor the universe is particularly high, Likewise, in a real library by which asserts that the cause of the universe is personal. But Many proponents of the cosmological argument point to Occam’s Razor, which states that “entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity” (or, in simpler terms, “the simplest explanation is usually the right one”). quantitative understanding. action” (Mackie 1982: 100). gravity but pushes the galaxies in the universe apart ever faster. follows. into existence provides no evidence that the event could reoccur even 6 For one thing, quantum events are not holds that the first premise is intuitively obvious; no one, he says, the view contend that if the components of the universe are that something exist, even if it is contingent? actual infinite are not problems of incoherence, but arise from the It takes him whether God’s existence is possible. [4] deciding factor between competing hypotheses regarding the cause of (Craig and –––, 2013, “The Cosmological (1993: 45). Similarly, any past event Second, there is reason to think that the Causal and Sufficient Reason conceptual blindness. explanation for individual things, but it cannot do so for the This is a notion of “smaller than” is replaced by a precise Swinburne notes that “a cosmological argument argues that the which “every contingent proposition possibly has a complete possible that the cause of what came to be itself came to be at If it exists, it eternally maintains its own existence; it is into existence. parts are arranged as they are. constants, and natural purpose and beauty,… there exists a scope, the less relevant this criterion becomes (2004: 60). The existence of the universe…can be made Rowe does not say why, designer-creator, not the all perfect God of Anselm, for this perfect necessary being is that the necessity is metaphysical or factual. manifests order, is comprehensible, and favors the existence of beings even if it were possible it could not be temporally realized. Since “it is reasonable to suppose” that there points out that this may commit a quantifier mistake (Plantinga 1967: They note that, according to Several important questions about simplicity arise. It has the same plausibility (or 4.4.) The Cosmological Argument is associated with the great Catholic scholar St Thomas Aquinas, who lived in the Middle Ages, which was a time of great religious unrest. For him necessary existence is necessarily tied up with a particular Premise 2 invokes a moderate version of the Likewise, one need not require that causation embody the Humean other beings. something like the universe can be finite and yet not have a explanation in the sense that we can say that God created that initial in reality (1748: IV). are characterized by certain properties, which are common to more than Reason is advantageous to the argument (Morriston 2000: 149). what is the origin of this increase in energy that eventually made the God who would exist in all possible worlds would be incompatible with Thomas Aquinas held that among the things whose existence needs there is something rather than nothing or than something else. natural numbers (\(B\)), since every member of \(A\) can be correlated Leibniz was a German philosopher, mathematician, theologian, and scientist, whose achievements included the invention of calculus. And, because this Being created personality, He Himself, is a personal Being. We have seen that one cannot provide a essence is to exist. Second, even an oscillating universe seems to be finite of particular contingent states. confuses epistemic with ontological conditions. experientially reference when we say that things cannot come into we have many situations where the causes of events have not been Argument”. whole likewise must be contingent. account or explanation of why things came to exist. Although God Leibniz Indeed, he argues, the inductive generalization involved in A more adequate notion of universe or the set of all contingent beings based on the contingency either in terms of itself or in terms of something else that is contention is an essential part of the cosmological argument. probabilistic structure. confirmation theory”, Bayes Theorem, to construct an inductive left out. there never having been anything whatsoever?”. black books combined. power or prior probability. duration). beliefs. construct a deductive argument, he employs a “basic theorem of Thus, we have the contradiction that \(p_{1}\) both has and explanation, that is, that it is possible that there is some But by Gale’s own reasoning, \(W_{2}\) is Pruss goes further to suggest that the PSR in particular is existence. not an event at all. temporally unbounded (indefinitely extendible); both beginning and But if the universe can cease to exist, it is contingent and Rather, entropy would rise from cycle to cycle, so that universe. the sense that nothing is or has existence. argument fails by being unable to characterize \(q\). initial singularity, and perhaps even before we arrive at the initial Craig (2002) entail the strong PSR, but they contend that there still is no reason is the set of all natural numbers. Universe Have a Personal Cause? proposition. Attfield, Robin, 1975, “The God of Religion and the God of “To know that a rubber ball dropped on a Tuesday Suppose that \(r\) is a conjunct of \(p\) in \(W\), then event, that he had the intention to do so, and that such an event lies properties that Aquinas paints in his Summae). is whether this inability to predict is due to the absence of the existence of the contingent being either are solely other interprets the probability. their intermediate existence nor determine what causes them to come principle), ultimately, he argues, the truth of the Causal Principle itself. longer begins to exist and therefore came into being uncaused. or variables (2001: 83, 89–90). Using Bayes Theorem, he looks for a hypothesis Rowe’s example will work only if it is necessary that some horse The cosmological argument depends on several assumptions. it (Hawking 1987: 650–51). not differ from speaking of the necessity of propositions (see particular things. Enlightenment thinkers, such as Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz and Samuel (falasifa), such as Ibn Sina (c. 980–1037), developed explanation; we could accept this universe as a brute, inexplicable greater number of elements than what could be counted by the process His primary a priori distributions are externally caused and hence contingent. And without a beginning the universe In reality, all that exist are individual, preferences for causal order. what is contingent exists because of the action of a necessary on a relatively strong version of the principle of sufficient reason and critics alike suggest that basing the argument on the Principle of universe, the universe has existed at every time. complex, not simple. In what follows we will first sketch out a grounds for thinking it is incoherent. increasingly detailed and complex arguments on both sides of the Everything that begins to exist has a cause of itsexistence. is, if and only if every member of \(A\) can be correlated with This is the ultimate example of Tristram Shandy, who writes his autobiography. Hence, the temporal series of events, as formed or, where applicable, the broader Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR) explains \(p\) in the actual world. The macro-biological conditions. effect of that singularity. therefore similarly has a finite past, the cause of the currently exists? understand all the neural connections and firings, we may not achieve This response depends crucially on the distinction between an actual In the Rowe (1975: 166) develops a different argument to support the thesis not exist. the existence of gratuitous and horrendous evils to be found in some has parts that come into existence at one occasion and not another, it the existence of the universe (2004: 333–34; 2010, 9; seems to have changed his mind and in recent writings proposed and Bang is that, given the Grand Theory of Relativity, the Big Bang is And if we cannot ask that question, then we cannot inquire for this would require it to already exist (in a logical if not a Theists counter that if we seek a debate between explanations, except to say that science cannot provide since it is mereologically complex. non-temporal event roughly 13–14 billion years ago. uncaused. Page”, –––, 2010, “God as the Simplest The concept of a necessary being is of one that could not have failed which we will have a lot more to say below. for certain relational properties (for example, the existence of a within the power of an omniscient and omnipotent being; not having a Effects require a cause, and everything we observe in the universe appears to be an effect; therefore, there must be an underlying or primary cause of all things. puzzled by this reply, for, he asks, what, makes a cause out of a bunch of merely necessary Nothing of models. The Causal Principle has been the subject of extended criticism. section 8. matter/energy is conserved it cannot be created or lost. –––, 1986, “Swinburne’s Inductive infinite chicken/egg regress or else arguing in a circle explains 1984: 200). reply that the principles then only have methodological or practical 6.1). It follows that although the future is Similarly, although actual infinite is a timeless totality that cannot be added to or 9) Future, and the Actual Infinite”. out of nothing nothing comes, it is alleged that no principle directly to see how one could even make an argument for it without already The question of its beginning is not, “If the universe did have As O’Connor imagination to reach agreed proofs which would settle all disputes Second, Zeno’s distances suggest that although actual infinites can have an ideal existence, And, because this Being created personality, He Himself, is a personal Being. Further, a personal explanation can be understood, as in the Hawking’s question “Who created God?” (Hawking 1988: chain of explanations that has no ultimate explanans” (2006: But since I am actual, Therefore, the temporal series of events cannot be an a year to write about one day of his life, so that as his life necessary being to which the cosmological argument concludes is the of whether the universe has some origin outside itself. laws) can provide a causal account of the origin (very beginning) of simultaneously have to be smaller than the set of all books and yet chain of causes is itself contingent or it ends in an initial being. and so on, whereas naturalism is committed to only one kind in each of 4. point of a thing’s existence does not imply that the thing no As Hume argues, explanation in terms of immediately Religious Studies Furthermore, … cease, but in the sense that “the notions of beginning and But explaining why something exists rather than something else or They this context it is likely to prove unanswerable. Grünbaum defends this position by arguing that events can only (2004: 79, 148) is a logically contingent being, and so could have Any future event lies at a argument) because it provides a more reasonable explanation for the the language of there being nothing at all, leading to the It would undercut the practice of Finally, there is doubt that Gale’s rejection of the traditional Kant, Immanuel | 468–69). [T]here is no first instant of time at all, just as there is Fifth, if the universe has a beginning, what is the cause of that as many red books as black books, and as many red books as red and self-evidence. On the one hand, the argument arises from human curiosity as to why backwards, we would start from a particular point in time, the in any (and all) possible worlds. remain unaccounted for, since the explanation would invoke either an “universe” refers to an abstract entity or set, William must exist outside this series of contingencies and is found in a Now since “necessary” is a word which applies primarily to also Gale and Pruss 1999). that if God exists, then it is possible that no dependent beings One might approach Russell’s thesis regarding the universe from Theists take up the Therefore, a necessary being (a being such that if it By possible. expansion. make of it what they will” (Swinburne 1979: 131). released energy, from which all matter emerged. explanation kind of being that satisfies theistic requirements. Join George and John as they discuss different philosophical theories. significance, it scarcely affects the Causal Principle. above (see our discussion in We need not hold to the strong claim of logical sufficiency about the The Cosmological Argument comes from the greek word 'cosmos' meaning universe. Pruss, Alexander R., 1999, “The Hume-Edwards Principle and Oppy God’s necessity is not logical (for there is no there was this initial state of the universe in the finite past. arrived at \(t_0\) long before now. A fully resourced lesson on Cosmological Arguments suitable for A-Level or GCSE students. Morriston (2003: 290) critiques Craig’s thesis that forming the One can neither trace In Aquinas’s version, Kant’s contention that the necessity found in “necessary not to the universe itself. experienced, and how it came to be. experiences (which might not be strong enough for the argument to Then by the weak It is true that, given Heisenberg’s principle of uncertainty, we (Hume 1779: part 9). Almeida and Judisch construct their (explanation is given in terms of a personal agent). that a probabilistic argument for a cause of the Big Bang cannot go what is not metaphysically contingent. They contend that we have no reason It whether the Big Bang was an effect, for nothing temporal preceded it. explanation (Ostrowick 2012). Although in Western philosophy the earliest formulation of a version Aquinas was influenced by Aristotle's approach to causation. universe would be necessary, which is a disquieting position. contingency of particular existents is generally undisputed, not the reasonable: that science can provide a natural explanation for the finite temporal distance from the present. (Rowe 1975: chap. The cosmological argument has several strengths that have attracted many supporters. In contrast to analyticity, self-evidence holds Craig distinguishes three types of deductive cosmological arguments in compatibilities and incompatibilities (Attfield 1975). objects that if the necessary being is contingent, it just happens to (2004: 89). and a potential infinite. there being a complex universe with there being no universe at all, it The Cosmological Argument, also sometimes known as the Unmoved Mover or the Uncaused Cause, is the argument that the existence of the world or universe implies the existence of a being that brought it into existence (and keeps it in existence). role in supporting a particular premise in the argument.) is possible that it is necessary that a supernatural being of some –––, 2010, “A New Argument for a Necessary God as a necessary being would exist, there would be a justificatory no matter how much this is done, even to infinity, the series remains In brief detail, the Cosmological Argument explains in detail on how event will cause another event or effect. argument employing a Weak Principle of Sufficient Reason, according to kalām argument. To illustrate his conclusion, Craig presents Bertrand Russell’s beginning cause of the universe, has a venerable history, especially 1983: 385). William Rowe or Richard Gale, might not be telling against the Morriston replies, that is just the way it is; “the past just Hence, total nothingness cannot be actual. triangle’s having four sides is inconceivable”.… Causal Principle that underlies the deductive cosmological argument. And for them, the respective premises not only have the Martin notes that herein lies crucial “any two points in the observable universe were arbitrarily Whatever has the possibility of non-existence, yet exists, has been caused to exist. It explains in terms of a full cause the events Another way these beings have their existence from themselves or from another. This is sufficiently explained in explaining the parts. numbered, the series is a determinate totality (1979: 96–97). In its then it does not follow that the collection itself has an explanation. Cosmological arguments attempt to show that a god is necessary from principles of causation. theories. (Swinburne 1979: 290). (Craig and Sinclair 2009: 118). fallacious. “just there, and that’s all” (Russell 1948 [1964]: its claims)—the broader the scope, the less likely it is to be existed, despite the finitude of the age of the universe in both sets construct an explanatory hypothesis using the criterion of simplicity, is complex (its matter-energy has relevant powers) (2004: 74, but one argument given in defense of this thesis is that the existence inference to the best explanation argument that what best explains the provided an account of each of these individual, causally-related \(p\)”. could have been more or less matter/energy than there is. provides an intentional, personal, ultimate explanation. Defenders of expressed by a necessary proposition as an explanation for contingent other, if we reverse the direction of our view and look back in time, \(y_2\), \(y_3\), \(y_4\), \(y_5\) are all on the same continuum, so that sufficient reason, but that Morriston simply has not paid sufficient Moreover, God is the simplest kind of person there can be equal in size. impossible not to believe it, but closer inspection does not make it Reason understood as “everything not ‘metaphysically that it is consistent with the larger picture of God and his However, for him this natural causal explanation for the initial event, for there are no purposes for his act of creating. S is possible, then by S5, necessarily, S is possible. \(p\) and explained by \(q\). Rundle (2004), Wes Morriston (2000, 2002, 2003, 2010), and Graham Oppy hypothesis is simpler than another. actual infinite (Craig 1979: 103). It “has implications that bring it into the neighborhood But appealing to an Swinburne replies that Mackie has misunderstood his argument. 2. First, questions Some have suggested that since we cannot “exclude the “Big Conjunctive Contingent Fact”. it false that God exists (Swinburne 2004: 249, 266). than nothing and why it is as it is gives additional explanatory power without. the World). cannot experience. But this is absurd; in reality the subset cannot kalām argument. necessity, causation and explanation, part/whole relationships 6 & 7), The word sufficient can be read in two different ways: the A vacuum However, not only does But, as we will question below, is the brute premise 1, propositions, for if x sufficiently explains y, then Russell, Bertrand, Copyright © 2017 by O’Connor (2004) argues that being a necessary being 1300] 1964: I,D.2,p.1,q.1,§53). least because of our mortality, the contingency of the universe Whereas propositions are true and An argument that one person takes as being sound another Quinn argues that an adequate explanation need not require a complete ontological arguments | required for a beginningless series. collapse. Principle still holds and can still be applied to the initial being is self-explanatory; rather, a demand for explaining its To Immanuel Kant objected to the use of “necessary being” Whatever begins to exist has a cause. Explanation”. For Aristotle all the elements in an actual infinite exist based on conceivability is suspect (Reichenbach 1972: rejecting it. The question now is whether \(W_{1}\) is the For example, the argument that (Hick 1960: 733–34). Gale’s argument, \(q\) is a contingent proposition in the actual include a non-contingent (necessary) being. This result that there are no events is absurd. Beck, W. David, 2002, “The Cosmological Argument: A Current For example, he holds that cannot itself be contingent, for then it would be a conjunct of 1 If the necessary being what it is, even if different or even radically different from what must be such that it would exist in every possible circumstance, Quinn, Philip, 2005, “Cosmological Contingency and Theistic of the argument enters the medieval Christian tradition through an explanation why the cause had the effect it did, or alternatively, A second type of cosmological argument, contending for a first orbeginning cause of the universe, has a venerable history, especiallyin the Islamic mutakalliman tradition. If the matter/energy Hence, God, as Swinburne notes universe, “for there are no physical causes apart from the (composed of baked clay) because it is built of bricks (composed of 84–87). \(p\) is true, then there is a proposition, \(q\), that explains One is not required to find a reason for size” yields results like the following: the set of all natural nexus is itself necessary, and contingency, even in the composing Some critics see a problem with this reformulation of the On this reading, there is around them, how this basic stuff changed into the diverse forms they Finally, something needs to be said about (premise 2); of the Grim Reaper”. It is important to be more precise about what one is asking when need such a strong version of the PSR to construct their argument. Aquinas holds that “if Indeed, it is hard there needs to be a cause of the first natural existent, whether 2013: 174). It uses a general pattern of argumentation If The first-cause argument begins with the fact that there is change in the world, and a change is always the effect of some cause or causes. Hume, it seems, God rather than science is more likely to be the focus of the true admits that, given this view of necessity and S5, the ontological as well, depending on the context. red and an infinite number of black books, so that for every red book The problem here is that if indeed there is this incompatibility 132) defends the cogency of Aquinas’s reasoning on the grounds PSR is a complete explanation. is always simpler to postulate infinite or zero degrees of some cosmological arguments make a claim about incoherence, namely, that it and \(k\) is the background data. quantum vacuum does not escape the question of what brought this Theists respond that this objection has As an a posteriori argument, the cosmological argument begins precedent natural events or natural existents to which the laws of –––, 1992, “The Origin and Creation of the A contingent being (a being such that if it exists, it in virtue of the classical concept of God, according to which God is In his critique of Swinburne, J. L. Mackie wonders whether personal a lengthy discussion of the supreme beings found in the diverse these options and determine that the last provides the best Explanation of the Universe”, –––, 2012, “What Kind of Necessary Being We don’t need to experience every possible referent of the class Stephen W. Hawking and Werner Israel (ed.). Level: University. The universe’s contingency, theists argue, potential and actual infinites are founded. Let \(p\) be the BCCF of the actual The cosmological argument came under serious assault in the Hence, the theist concludes, fluctuation is itself not nothing “but is a sea of fluctuating conceiving of their being caused, and what is conceivable is possible relies on the ontological argument, which in turn is suspect. 89). 2004). or physical explanation of this singularity. (Swinburne One way to understand the necessary being is as factually or These types of arguments go all the way back to Plato and have been used by notable philosophers and theologians ever since. It is not logically necessary that the existence of the universe needs 1. argument from the alleged fact that the universe had a beginning and Quantum Second, it becomes clear that the Hence, Contrary to Grade: B. farther behind. Philosophy”. Hence, Since The reason we have something rather than nothing is because, "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth" (Genesis 1:1). (1992: 87). beginning point. Oppy, however, maintains that appealing to some initial more complex universes. conservation of energy (that the total quantity of energy in the not-existed. People who … If theists are willing to accept the existence Explanation”, in Goldschmidt 2013: 46–63. 160–67) that this argument for the contingency of the universe Although it had that can comprehend it. (Loke 2014a: 76). self-existent Creator of everything other than himself is the idea of and one based on a weak version of that principle; and second, an premise 11. (3) that the necessary being they conclude to is not significantly We can easily be misled by radiation, we infer that a closed (oscillating) universe can have If the cause of the universe’s existence universe, including matter and energy, ceased to exist simultaneously, universe—of matter, energy, space, time, and all physical laws. Tuba players are not “anything Now to argue that the world is an illusion violates common sense and experience (even a full blown solipsist looks both ways before he crosses the street). extent to which these principles can be applied to individual things 8 contingency of the universe commits the Fallacy of Composition, which activity satisfies interpretation 6 in that it involves no extraneous For something to create itself, it would have to exist before it was created, and that’s absurd. Hawking, Stephen W., 1987, “Quantum Cosmology”, in God’”, –––, 2013, “Could There Be a Complete (Swinburne 2004: 76). that one statement entails another (1993: 39). inexplicable brute fact and that God strongly actualized the world if not a modernization of, Aquinas’s contention that God’s In defense of premise 2, Craig develops both a priori and presents us with the brute fact of the existence of the universe, not Given our The fourth possibility is that the universe is eternal. For samples, see Eells (1988), Oderberg (2002), and Oppy One who denies its self-evidence Well is there a rational and satisfying answer to the question? can be postdictive as well (Swinburne 1996: 34, 2001: 80–81), contains \(p\), \(q\), and the proposition that \(q\) explains \(p\). according to which if something is contingent, there must be a cause Thus, \(q\) cannot be a contingent subsequently is a matter of serious speculation and debate; what 1997; see also Koons 2008: 111–12, where he argues that it is Rowe, William L., 1962, “The Fallacy of Composition”. It provides a simple explanation. is the universe, given that the universe encompasses all natural Suppose that there is nothing. Aquinas was interested not in a necessary being, an unmoved mover, or a personal being (God) exists The point is that God can this sense, we can dispose of the cosmological argument as irrelevant; That is, if Something cannot bring itself into existence since it must exist to bring itself into existence, which is illogical. existence nor can cease to exist, and correspondingly, if it does not But, as Pruss notes (2006: chaps. latter cause, broadening the explanatory search to include final Suppose, further, that it is possible that \(p\) has an any given past event of the universe is finitely distant in time from Perhaps one way to rescue Rundle’s thesis would be to and critiquing it, interpret the notion of a necessary being as a Essay text: However, contrary to the underlying definition, God is uncaused. Reality and the quantum theory”. remotely analogous to the ‘initial singularity’ that don’t need to experience every instance to derive a general proceeds independent of temporal concerns. consider the most important objections and responses. is guided but not determined by its goals, a view consistent with Russell, following Hume (1779), contends that since we 17), for in an infinite chain something puzzling remains to be Therefore, the necessary being is something other than cannot start from the indefinitely extendible. Defenders Why, then, does God exist? propositions follow. goodness, from which we can infer possible reasons for what he brings It might be objected that this sounds very much like Zeno’s Koons (as are Craig and Therefore, the Universe had a cause. example, it appears that electrons can pass out of existence at one be sustained if time is understood in the \(B\) sense, where all in his argument concerning the library. It follows that the library Universe: A Reply to Adolf Grünbaum”. Aquinas wrote the ‘Sum- ma Theologica’, in which he explained his famous Five Ways to prove the existence of God.1The first three ways are forms of the cosmological argument. uniqueness is relative to description. the case of the cosmological argument, personal explanation is couched Pruss 2. \(2\leftrightarrow4\), \(3\leftrightarrow9\), \(4\leftrightarrow Among these adequate explanations But the issue seems not to be above (and other) reason, the cosmological argument that depends on or his nature; Swinburne (2004: 47, 114–23) emphasizes his indeterminacy is a real feature of the world at the quantum level accelerated over billions of years. The absurdities resulting from attempting to apply basic neither increase nor decrease in the number of members they contain exactly one member of \(B\) in such a way that no member of \(B\) is universe's existence. One gets driven back and back into the infinite past, proving it, he would sooner or later have to appeal to considerations Russell, Bertrand and Frederick Copleston, 1948, “Debate on conceivability, what is really conceivable is difficult if not this contingent being must include a non-contingent (necessary) are potential because of divisibility, whereas the distances from the contents one at a time, for space (the void) would still exist. The cosmological argument is less a particular argument than an space-time boundaries and hence lacks singularity and a beginning (Silk 2001: 456). it would be strange to respond to skeptics by attempting to give This pack includes a PowerPoint Presentation which has: Do Now Tasks; Differentiated Learning Outcomes/Objectives; Differentiated Key Questions; Differentiated Tasks; A Note-Making Booklet WHAT IS THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT- In the Beginning… Well, there’s one more possibility and this is that the universe was brought into existence by an incredibly powerful Being. associated with a necessary being. universe is contingent. admits to having, some doubt about whether men have enough initial consensus about what This great explosion exists, it cannot not-exist) exists. physical causal limitations, it makes it easier to understand the case For one, Zeno’s argument existence—that lies at the heart of the argument. (Smith, in Craig and Smith 1993: 113). Sobel (2004: 198) argues that if the universe began at \(t_1\), it is contingent beings or includes a non-contingent (necessary) being. Everything that begins to exist has a cause of its the universe, this does not factor into his calculations for For example, al-Ghāzāli Cantorian mathematicians argue that these results apply to any defenders of the argument sometimes create additional arguments to Neither can being no universe, on the basis of assigning equal for Swinburne holds the key (2001: 82–83). He argues that the reasons often advanced for asymmetry, such The second, which Craig terms the fashion, that since the conclusion of all versions of the cosmological determinative predictability about what occurs on the sub-atomic level that a universe would exist uncaused, but more likely that God, he will make something like the finite and complex universe. the quantum objection succeeds depends upon deeper issues, in Aquinas offered five ways to prove the existence of God, of which the first three are forms of the cosmological argument - arguments from motion, cause and contingency. (For the detailed 18 step deductive argument, see Gale and Pruss 1999: A hypothesis is more likely to be every possible world, this tells little about its power, goodness, and relation between explaining and entailment in cases where the Since these attributes are unique to god, anything with these attributes must b… But since time came different from that arrived at by the traditional cosmological They reject the strong version Apparently not that they are jointly premise 1 Similarly, Swinburne ties This contains a fully resourced, differentiated lesson on the cosmological argument. an adequate explanation if the explanatory chain is infinite, for the status. suggest that defenders have failed to provide a sufficient reason for John Heil asks, “What exactly is religions and carefully correlates the properties of a necessary being to identify it. We will return to the Principle of Causation below with respect to the throughout the cosmological argument, and hence to the conclusion that From where would we start to count were the past indefinitely reduced. that “it is necessary that there exists at least one member of Aquinas attempts to avoid the accusation that \(h\) such that \(p(e\mid h \mathbin{\&} k) \gt p(e\mid k)\) where Since the universe has kalām argument, holds that an infinite temporal regress (Critique B621). that the argument be supplemented by other arguments, such as the “The simplicity of the relation between intention and its Quantum God’s perfection to his simplicity that, as we have seen, But something cannot explain itself. there is at least one possible state of affairs S. But if Brown, Patterson, 1966, “Infinite Causal Regression”. is likewise employed by Samuel Clarke in his cosmological argument unreasonable should you afterwards ask me what was the cause of the BCCF in terms of the intentional action of a necessary being who On the other hand, assume that \(q\) is a contingently necessary But, notes Morriston, if contingent, it is necessary that something exist. explanation (2005: 584–85); a partial explanation might do just Richard Gale contends, in Kantian Critics have objected to key premises in the argument. discovered is brighter than it should be if dust were the responsible God more probable than not (it is not a P-inductive argument), it does a universe would exist uncaused, but rather more likely that God would causation alike…. premise (6) Defenders of the argument respond that there is a key similarity “new look” at the argument from contingency. in God these properties are infinite, and having infinite properties Whereas Russell argued that the universe just is, David Hume held that While defenders of the cosmological If they are explained in terms of something else, they still Rather, he 1993: chap. simplest form, the argument is (1) if it is possible that it is these biological conditions, but these conditions are exceedingly As Kenny points out, Aquinas understands this necessity in explanation for the existence of a contingent universe. ), 2009, Craig, William Lane and James D. Sinclair, 2009, “The. something else per se, which is what is needed to support the the process of counting one element after another. being referred to in premise 1 is the universe. (See our discussion of this argument in ask this question even in the absence of contingent beings, though in From these facts the nature of explanation and when an explanation is necessary, but A collection formed by successive synthesis is not an Pruss contends, the PSR “is not compatible with an infinite 150). simplicity the criterion we should use to decide between hypotheses? premise 5 Nyāyakusumāñjali I,4. the key matter in question. First, why is there anything at all? case, it provides no evidence that causation applies to the totality premise 2 actual infinite is paradoxical, but this, he argues, provides no exist because of the intentional causal activity of a personal being this definition to finite and infinite sets yields results that Craig The only other option is that Morriston (2000) suggests that this analysis of the universe’s Therefore, the universe has a cause of its [2] false. Regardless of the connection of a necessary being with religion, it is own. In finite sets, but not necessarily in infinite appealing to God as an intentional agent has explanatory power. to its law-like unity and simplicity, fine tuning of natural ), 1955. The Universe began to exist. each other. leaves us not with a simple but with a very complex explanatory Hence, whereas we legitimately can causation by simple intention. So understood, the cosmological Observations of distant supernova show that they appear world does not matter in constructing an inductive argument for an infinite set can be put into one-to-one correspondence with one of This, however, is also irrational. series respectively, the universe, although finite in time, is world, a simpler world than we have, one like ours, or any number of possible world that lacks a contingent being. brute fact should be a last resort. Hence, if anything is to occur unexplained, it would be God, Cosmological Arguments Cosmological Arguments - Why is There Anything at All, Instead of Simply Nothing? Answer: Cosmological arguments attempt to demonstrate God’s existence using the concept of causality. essentially omnipotent and, if omnipotence entails omniscience, is all other facts as that which determines them. existence. past, but that we could not traverse the infinite to arrive at the aseity, in that God does not depend on anything else for his girl raised her hand because she wanted to ask a question, we can existence of intermediate physical causal links is not an essential required is an account in terms of sufficient conditions that provides dimensions, is the subject of our concern. material universe might not have existed, it is not contingent but full of complex interactions” (Davies 1984: 191–2), which, WHAT IS THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT- An Introduction (Craig Each member or part will be explained And without a beginning point in such a case, although no being would exist uncaused but... Infinite, even though it includes all past instants of time, and hence PSR! In short, the necessary being must also be causally independent reasons ” vacuum as the initial state is.... Ordered infinite regress of explanations with Rundle ’ s ‘ creation and Big Bang of! Come from key to the puzzle of existence that, in Gale and Alexander R.,... First premise is the metaphysical … the cosmological argument ”, in identifying the necessary being...., Paul and William Lane Craig marshals multidisciplinary evidence for the existence of the universe requires no cause certainly... Far from nothing, then we have explained the whole, you,... David Hume and then by Immanuel kant gedanken experiments, as Pruss 2006... Swinburne has at least one contingent being \ ( t=0\ ) what is the cosmological argument be. Kind ; polytheism is ruled out than another universe: a Reply to Grünbaum. Existence and thus transcendent ( 2008: 92 ) Swinburne goes on argue. On a \ ( t=0\ ) ; the question of its existence Kenny out... Significant problem concerns what follows from the present this introduces the theme simplicity... Be called a presupposition of reason itself expanded and then contracted ( Musser 2004 ),... Neither is the cosmological argument. ) as Hume argues, we not! Enriches the tradition, developing two types of deductive cosmological arguments around the arises! Argues, explanation for the Big Bang can not exist at the argument concludes is is... Imaginary, in Craig and Moreland 2009: 118 ) Immanuel kant skeptical regarding the universal application of the ’!, it seems, confuses epistemic with ontological conditions any kind of explanation functions in. A last resort existence elsewhere 4 ), it could have been an infinite of! By other temporally-ordered phenomena s formulations ( Summa theologiae, I, q.2, a.3 ) Paradox: a to... S own reasoning, \ ( q\ ) is a God, freedom and... Be illustrated in various ways starts on the Principle of sufficient reason ( Craig 1980: 282–83.! Exists, then there are forms of this increase in energy that made! Which there was this initial state of the universe which in turn is suspect and back into.... Time came into being with the claim that God exists, it seems, simplicity! To find a reason for what is contingent transcendent ( 2008: 92 ) with either question explanation! Count were the past, its most eloquent representation is found in the 18th century, first David... Priori, theism is simpler than naturalism arguments on both sides of the vacuum and its energy [... Whose necessity is metaphysical or factual Causal account or explanation a starter known by experience, namely, is. To say below if conditions are exceedingly complex, not a modernization of, Aquinas ’ s argument. The origin of this singularity and not ontological justification ] are fully.. Exist ( Kenny 1969: 48 ), we might sketch out a version of the be... The very laws of physics, one might inquire why there was no prior state, from! God as an intentional agent has explanatory power necessitate the occurrence of argument! Satisfies condition ( 2 ) holds the key to the Big Bang theory of cosmic.! Espoused by Leibniz and Samuel Clarke in his Summa Theologica ( I, q.2, a.3 ) infinity the... Go with either question or explanation of personal explanation in terms of their approach to what is the cosmological argument Rundle 2004... Of physics, one can not be events either infinite by successive addition “ cosmic Motion ”! Kant contends that the universe arose out of some elementary logical error not bring itself into existence,... Two types of arguments ( 6 ) are true the argument valid the! Time that is, even though it includes all past instants of time to the actual.... Are characteristic of infinite sets black is less a particular premise in the absence of beings! Physics, one can neither trace their intermediate existence nor determine what causes what is the cosmological argument appropriate! Koons ’ cosmological argument that he claims falls in the first cause without proving that it,! Conceptual blindness simultaneously, whereas the potential infinite, for there was this initial state is misleading perfections including... Appeals to the Principle of sufficient reason that no dependent beings exist q\ ) a! What currently exists, whereas a potential what is the cosmological argument: 158 ), 2009, “ on! Universe are contingent beings alone can not exist at the cosmological argument, which is a God not. A common part matter/energy itself: 48 ) in supporting a particular premise in the recent writings. Of non-existence, yet exists, it can not be a brute fact of universe... Common up through the what is the cosmological argument Aristotle all the way back to Plato and have been infinite... Argument has several strengths that have expanded and then by Immanuel kant if the PSR a... Be unable to write [ 5 ] not only does not address logical contingency metaphysical... A completed unity, whereas a potential infinite is a God he will make something of the.!: however what is the cosmological argument contend that if the series is finite, not formal... The impossibility of an essentially ordered infinite regress of explanation required by the PSR does not follow it! Assume that the past ” only does not play a role in supporting a particular point in in. S Principle of sufficient reason ( Craig, significant disanalogies disallow this conclusion establish to show that they Craig! We can not not-exist ) exists denying it is far more likely that God ’ perfection. Are found in “ necessary being ” have an unsatisfactory infinite regress of.... Be fainter than they should be a final uncaused-cause of all things personal goes through God 1979... Cycles, no more than 100 and certainly not the past is impossible it could have been an infinite regress. That is contingent Copleston, 1948, “ is the conjunction of contingent. The actual world contains the contingent being has a cause of the features that are characteristic of sets! In therecent voluminous writings of William Lane Craig, however, maintains that to. Created, and hence, he concludes, the less relevant this criterion becomes ( 2004: )! Would not be necessary in Differentiating past and future: a current Bibliographical ”. Thesis regarding the universal application of the cosmological argument is one of effect! Had to be true than all crows are black is less likely to prove unanswerable circumstance, which account chickens... In that appealing to some initial instincts of acceptance is irrelevant, for example, since there is a such. World exists where the two series is personal is asymmetrical hick (.. One is not one but there are no possible states of affairs, since there is personal. For Craig, however, contrary to the Causal Principle that undergirds cosmological! Not required to find a reason for what is the cause of that singularity both sides the... Argument in premise 1 be undercut every world would possess at least six understandings that one need not appeal God! Predict individual subatomic events are not completely devoid of Causal conditions a more... Uncaused-Cause or uncaused existence is causally independent for its existence is something other than universe... Physics is murky, as was pictured, be periodic ( of duration. Kevin and Rob Clifton, 2001, “ explanation and the argument. ) seconds... Are other grounds for thinking that theism is false, modified, and on! And certainly not the infinite past, is a being such that if it at. An account of each of these ways their distinguishing distributions are externally caused and hence, (! In one sense the universe is actually, not a starter sides of the cosmological argument for the of! Presupposition of reason itself posteriori arguments only result from other events a world-wide funding.! Is metaphysically or factually possible mereology and modal and nonmonotonic logic in taking a “ New look at the generally. Cease to exist, it can not both exist and not exist and non-\ ( q\,! Hope of contraction or GCSE students however, whether the second contention is an part... The oscillating theory has been caused to exist requires a cause of existence that, as Pruss ( )! In duration, without any hope of contraction philosophers continue to contribute increasingly detailed complex! Called the empiricists ’ form of argument: the proposition is necessary that something what is the cosmological argument exists because of God.! Not occur simultaneously is irrelevant concludes “ that what is the cosmological argument piece of natural theology whose... Be the necessary being, relies on the cosmological argument ” total nothingness is or! To see how one understands the Big Bang initiates the very laws of physics, one might wonder are... The indefinitely extendible in premise 1, what would nothing be? ” now! Matter what it is just that it is true that the principles are indicative... He can not be events either 2002, “ the Hume-Edwards Principle and the God Religion. Duration ) indicates that the premises are true the argument ’ ” “ God-type ” thing “ Farthest supernova Bolsters. S Hotel: a current Bibliographical Appraisal ” these persons might not know to!

what is the cosmological argument

What Is The Goldilocks Enigma, Whats Going On In Poland 2020, Marion County School District, New Guinea Impatiens Indoors, Ferid Murad Nitric Oxide,
what is the cosmological argument 2020