The Cosmological Argument Essay

1193 Words 5 Pages
The Cosmological Argument

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. It states that there must be a final uncaused-cause of all things. This uncaused-cause is asserted to be God. The Cosmological Argument takes several forms but is basically represented below.

Cosmological Argument

1. Things exist.

2. It is possible for those things to not exist.

3. Whatever has the possibility of non existence, yet exists, has been caused to exist.

A. Something cannot bring itself into existence since it must exist to bring itself into existence which is
…show more content…
Weaknesses of the argument

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. This is paradoxical. Also, by definition, God is uncaused.

The Cosmological Argument

The basic notion of cosmological arguments is that the world and everything in it is dependent on something other than itself for its existence. In other word's, despite the fact that the world seems to be self-perpetuating one needs to consider the source of all that there is.

Although the cosmological argument was famously expressed in three of Thomas Aquinas' Five Ways (rational arguments for the existence of God), there is an early form of it in the writings of Plato (see Plato's Cosmological Argument), and the argument is also largely grounded in the metaphysics of Aristotle. Both Plato and Aristotle argued that the fact of motion (i.e. things move) requires a mover ('... the series must start with something for nothing can come from nothing' (Aristotle)). The key idea is that if something exists there must be preliminary factors that have influenced (and caused) it

Related Documents