The Cosmological Argument Essay

The existence of God has been an argument that society has been fighting for years, along with other debates within them. If you believe that God exists, then the argument would be whether or not Jesus Christ is his one true born son. The cosmological argument only deals with the fact that the universe is created by a great designer. Some say that this argument is illogical because one can simply not know whether or not that there is an intelligent creator, and the universe could create itself through nothingness. Then again, it is impossible to know whether or not that the universe did create itself from the void. The cosmological proof is a both a valid and invalid argument in many ways. It is a valid argument for those who want to believe, and an invalid argument for those who are more dubious and …show more content…
Hume believes that we cannot conclude that similar causes from unrelated effect. Which is lead to thinking that Hume believes that causes and effect has to be analogous to each other. In his other book, Causation, Hume states that humans cannot possibly place a cause and a random effect in any fashion without experience. Hume stated from Causation, “Were a man, such as Adam, created in the full vigor of understanding, without experience, he would never be able to infer motion in the second ball from the motion and impulse of the first” (Hume, C., 178). It seems like in Analogy and the Argument from Design, that Cleanthes, Demea, and Philo is connecting the universe with other items and ideas, but they could not possibly know for sure because they never experience it. They would compare the universe with a machine (Hume. A.A., 214). It is the same when people try to assume that the universe exists through self-creation, or assume that the universe exists because of an intelligent creator. The cosmological argument is a valid argument, whereas the argument through analogy tends to make it a weaker