Chapter 4 Cosmological arguments for Gods existence Cosmological

Chapter 4: Cosmological arguments for God’s existence

Cosmological argument Ø Derived from the Greek terms cosmos (world or universe) and logos (reason or rational account). Ø First developed by the ancient Greek philosophers, the argument takes a variety of forms. Ø The common theme among them all is that since there is a cosmos which exists, it must have been caused by something beyond it.

The argument from contingency 1. There are contingent things in the world 2. Not all things can be contingent, for nothing would now exist 3. Since contingent things do exist, there must be some non-contingent, or necessary thing (or being) 4. We call this necessary thing (or being) God This argument is also known as the Thomistic argument (after Thomas Aquinas who developed it in his work Summa Theologiae)

Objectors and their objections Ø Bertrand Russell ØThe contingent series just is ØThe fallacy of composition Ø Hume ØExplaining the parts of a whole explains the whole itself Ø Others ØWho caused God to exist? ØWhy must the necessary cause be God?

The sufficient reason argument 1. All things which exist must have sufficient reason for their 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. existence The sufficient reason must lie either inside or outside thing The sufficient reasons for all things in the universe lie outside themselves The universe is just a collection of the things of which it consists Thus, there must be a sufficient reason for the entire universe that lies outside itself There cannot be an infinite regress of sufficient reasons, for then there would be no final explanation of things Therefore, there must be a first self-explanatory thing whose sufficient reason for its existence lies in itself rather than outside itself

Objections Ø Impossibility of demonstration Ø Incoherency of principle Ø Subjectivity Ø Objections of explanation from science Indeterminacy vs. explanation Epistemology vs. ontology ØEinstein vs. Bohr

The kalam argument Universe No beginning Supports • Crossing the infinite argument • The second law of thermodynamics • The big bang theory Beginning Not caused Caused Not personal Personal

Objections Ø The temporal series has no beginning Ø The oscillating universe theory Ø The universe is infinite Ø Alternatives ØA to the big bang personal cause that isn’t God

The argument for atheism 1. The big bang singularity is the earliest state of the universe 2. The earliest state of the universe is inanimate 3. No law governs the big bang singularity, so there is no guarantee that it will evolve into an animate universe 4. The earliest state of the universe is not guaranteed to evolve into an animate state of the universe 5. Premise 4 is inconsistent with the hypothesis that God – the classical Judeo–Christian–Islamic view of God as creator of the universe – created the earliest state of the universe since it is true that if God created the earliest state of the universe, then God would have ensured that the earliest state of the universe evolved into an animate state of the universe 6. Therefore, the classical Judeo–Christian–Islamic God does not exist.

Objections Ø The singularity, unlike the big bang, is more like a work of theoretical fiction Ø God is not bound by laws or a lack of them for accomplishing His purposes Ø The theistic hypothesis of creation is simpler, and thus more likely to be true than the atheistic hypothesis

Questions for discussion Is it reasonable to be a theist without evidence? Is it reasonable to be an atheist without evidence? Are you persuaded by any of the three cosmological arguments for God’s existence described? The cosmological argument for atheism is logically valid. What do you make of the objections raised in order to disprove one or more of its premises?