Our writers can help get your essay back on track, take a look at our services to learn more about how we can help. Essay writing service essay marking service place an order if everything has a cause, what caused the first cause god? if god did create the universe, how do we know it was just one god? the counter argument indicated that the cosmological argument do not necessarily lead to the conclusion that there was a being that is responsible for the creation of the universe. God is omnipotent all powerful , omnipresent everywhere at once , omniscient all knowing and omnisapient has all wisdom. They believe that god is exempt from the uncaused cause because he is eternal and not dependent on a cause for his existence. They go on to say that we may never know why or how creation took place or to explain gods intentions of the event but he is an omniscient and omnipotent being.

How to Write An Ap English Literature Essay

They believe that the bible has scripture that goes along with these arguments and proves his existence. To the non believers, they think that the cosmological arguments provide no evidence of the existence of god and that it just raises more questions about the origin or the universe. Could it be that there is no explanation? did the universe just happen or has it always existed? this may be one of those questions that science will never have an answer for and to that everyone will accept.

I personally believe that god exist and that there is proof, to me everyday that he does. The cosmological argument q: outline the cosmological argument for the existence of god. The cosmological argument is an argument that starts from the existence of the universe, and from this attempts to prove the existence of god. It is important to state that the most this argument can hope to prove is that there exists a necessary being who caused everything in the universe it cannot arrive at the judaic christian conception of god i.e. Thomas aquinas 1225 1274 , although may well have originated from platonic or aristotelian ideas. The argument is also known as 'aquinas third way' the argument from contingency and necessity. Aquinas was already a firm believer, and so it is not entirely clear what the purpose of the arguments were i.e.

Aquinas starts his argument with what he considers to be a universal truth that all things in the world come into and go out of existence, that they are contingent or depend upon other factors for their existence. This leads to the conclusion that there must be some being 'having of itself its own necessity', a being that is de re necessary. Q: what are the strengths and weaknesses of the cosmological argument? there are many weaknesses of the cosmological argument as well as some strengths. The first question that has to be overcome before the cosmological argument can be successful or even applicable , is 'why does there have to be a cause for the universe?' if the answer to this question is ' there doesn't, the universe is just there', then the argument is useless. However, this is not a weakness in the argument itself and so will not be treated as such. The first and best strength of the cosmological argument is that it starts from the seemingly indisputable fact that the universe exists. The argument also follows a logical form, guaranteeing a successful outcome, provided that the premises are true.

A further weakness of the argument is whether or not the principal of sufficient reason is correct or not. Why should it be any more probable that there is a necessary cause than an infinite regression? i do not believe that this question can be answered. Immanuel kant also criticised the cosmological argument as he held that it is impossible to speculate about something that lives outside space and time when we are confined to the limits of them. The final criticism that i will mention is the same as i mentioned at he beginning of this essay that this argument is incapable of arriving at the existence of many peoples conception of god that at best it can only prove the existence of a necessary being. I have only mentioned a few of the arguments against the cosmological argument and yet all of the strengths that i can think of. However, despite this, considering the lack of knowledge of aquinas it is of very logical form and may have been far more persuasive at the time. The above preview is unformatted text the cosmological argument attempts to prove that god exists by showing that there cannot be an infinite number of regressions of causes to things that exist.

The cosmological argument takes several forms but is basically represented below. Whatever has the possibility of non existence, yet exists, has been caused to exist.

something cannot bring itself into existence since it must exist to bring itself into existence, which is illogical. there cannot be an infinite number of causes to bring something into existence.

an infinite regression of causes ultimately has no initial cause, which means there is no cause of existence. thomas aquinas 1224 1274 had a version of the cosmological argument called the argument from motion. He stated that things in motion could not have brought themselves into motion but must be caused to move. The strengths of the cosmological argument lie in both its simplicity and easily comprehensible concept that there cannot be an infinite number of causes to an event. Some arguments for god's existence require more thought and training in terms and concepts, but this argument is basic and simple.

Hepatitis B Review Article

Also, it is perfectly logical to assert that objects do not bring themselves into existence and must, therefore, have causes. One of the weaknesses of the argument is that if all things need a cause to exist, then god himself must also by definition need a cause to exist. But this only pushes causation back and implies that there must be an infinite number of causes, which cannot be. Since the very beginning of human life, man has tried to identify the source of everything. Who am i? , what made me? , did man create the stars? if not, there must be a higher being than humans, but who? humans have always felt the need to rely on a higher being, a god, each culture identifying him either as one or many gods working together, but ultimately they provide protection, resources and strength to everyone and everything.

Professional Ksa Writing Service

But who is god? questions such as these prompted philosophers to ponder on the existence of a god two of the arguments produced in reference to god's existence shall be discussed. Incorporating aristotle's notion of a prime mover into summa theologica and elsewhere, thomas aquinas famously formulated his version of the cosmological or first cause argument. According to this argument, the things which we see around us now are the products of a series of previous causes.

Thus there must be some first cause which was not itself caused by anything else. Every thing has either been caused to exist by something else or else exists uncaused. The most crucial objection to the argument itself is that unless we know that premise 2 is true, the argument fails. If the universe is infinitely old, for instance, every thing could indeed be caused by something else before it the series of causes could go back forever. But perhaps more importantly, one could hold that the argument succeeds without believing that god exists.

There could be multiple uncaused causes mdash multiple gods, say mdash or the uncaused cause could be an unintelligent, impersonal force. Finally, the argument holds that god is required to explain the existence of the universe, but offers no explanation for why god exists. And arguments based on philosophical considerations concerning time and causation.

traditional cosmological arguments

in this section of his compassionate introduction to atheism.