The Cosmological
Argument
• Also known as ‘The First Cause Argument’
• Unlike the Ontological Argument, it derives
the conclusion from a posteriori premise
• The argument is an a posteriori argument
because it is based on what can be seen
in the world and the universe
• The argument is based on the belief that
there is a first cause behind the existence
of the universe (the cosmos)
• The argument claims that the universe
cannot account for it’s own existence and
so this argument seeks causes that have
their solution in the existence of a god.
• It’s an argument that has a long history
• In Timaeus, Plato says ‘that every created
thing must created by some cause’
• Aristotle shared his concept of the Prime
Mover
• The most popular form is presented by
Aquinas in the first three of his ‘Five Ways’
• Descartes and Leibniz support it too
• Modern philosophers are Craig and
Swinburne
• Main opponents- Hume and Kant
• The basic cosmological argument is based
on contingency
• A contingency is something that may or
may not happen, an event or condition
depends on something else which may or
may not happen. Things do not contain
the reason for their own existence but
depend on external causes
• So, the basic CA is based on contingency
and states:Things come into existence because
something has caused them to happen
Things are caused to exist because they
do not have to exist
There is a chain of causes going back to
the beginning of time
Time began with the creation of the
universe
There must have been a first cause,
which brought the universe into
existence
This first cause must have necessary
existence to cause the contingent
universe
Only God can have necessary existence
Therefore God is the first cause of the
contingent universe’s existence
•
•
•
The CA has taken many forms and been
presented in many ways
In each form the argument focuses on
the causes that lead to the existence of
things
The argument tries to answer the
questions
1. How did the universe begin?
2. Why was the universe created?
3. Who created the universe?
St. Thomas Aquinas 1225-1274
• Very influential philosopher and theologian
• Highly regarded by Roman Catholics
• Lived in a time when a renewed interest in
Aristotle coincided with a view that
philosophy could be useful to Christian
theology to demonstrate the
reasonableness of faith
• Aquinas attempted to apply the philosophy
of Aristotle to Christianity
• The philosophy of Aquinas- (Thomism)
• Wrote loads and in Summa Theologica
(4000 pages)- devoted only two pages to
his arguments for the existence of God
• Their compact form made them popular
• Became known as the Five Ways
The Five Ways
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The Unmoved Mover (motion or change)
The Uncaused Causer (cause)
Possibility and Necessity (contingency)
Goodness, Truth and Nobility
Teleological
(All a posteriori- first three ways different
variations fo the CA)
The First Way
• The Unchanged Changer/the Prime Mover
• Based on motion
• Aquinas speaking of motion in the
broadest sense, i.e. movement from one
place to another, also movement in the
sense of change of quality or quantity
• An object only moved when an external
force was applied to it
• This chain of movements or changes
cannot go back to infinity
• There must have been a first, or prime,
mover which itself was unmoved
• Aquinas argued the Prime Mover is God
• Read and learn his example of the wood
• Expressed formally:
Everything that is in motion (change) is
moved (changed) by something else
Infinite regress is impossible
Therefore there must be a first mover
(changer)
• Aquinas not arguing that the Universe
necessarily had a beginning. He thought it
did but he said you could not reason that
out as it was revealed doctrine
• His emphasis was on dependency
• This dependency argument reappeared in
the 20th century with Swinburne
• Christian theology has always taught that
God sustains the universe
• i.e. if God ceased to exist then the
universe would also cease to exist
• Therefore there must be an initiator of the
change whose continued existence is
dependent upon
The Second Way
• The Uncaused Causer (the First Cause
Argument)
• This follows a similar line of argument but
replaces motion (change) with cause:»Every effect has a cause
»Infinite regress is impossible
therefore there must be a first cause
• Aquinas identified a series of causes and
effects in the universe
• He observed that nothing could be the
cause of itself as this would mean that it
would have had to exist before it existed
• This would be a logical impossibility
• He rejected an infinite series of causes
and said there must have been a first,
uncaused, cause.
• This first cause started the chain of causes
that have caused all events to happen
• This first cause was God
• One of the differences between the two
ways is that in the first attention is centred
on the fact that things are acted upon
whereas in the second the attention is on
the things doing the acting upon
The Third Way
• Possibility and Necessity (contingency)
• For Aquinas anything that had a property
was referred to as a ‘being’
• The world is full of contingent beings
• Beings that have a beginning and an end
• If all beings were contingent, then at one
time nothing would have existed
• This is because there would have been a
time prior to the coming into existence of
contingent beings
• If that is the case, then nothing would be
able to come into existence as everything
contingent has a prior cause
• Thus there must be at least one being
which cannot be contingent
• There must exist a necessary being
• Aquinas calls this God
• Expressed formally:»Contingent beings exist
»Because they exist, then a
necessary being must exist
»That necessary being = God
• He concluded that if God did not exist then
nothing would exist
Gottfried Leibniz’s Argument
1646-1716
• The Principle of Sufficient Reason
• Leibniz accepted the CA because he
believed that there had to be a ‘sufficient
reason’ for the universe exist
• He did not accept that it was uncaused
• Hence he rejected an infinite universe
theory
David Hume’s Challenge
(1711-1776)
• Hume believed that all knowledge comes
from our sense experience
• Hume concluded that humans think that
they know a great deal more about the
external world than is warranted
• Humans make the mistake of allowing
imagination to make a connection between
cause and effect
• We observe a conjunction of events but
they are in fact two separate events
occurring at two separate times
• The mind has a habit of making a
connection between the two events, this is
called induction
• (Induction = a method of reasoning where
a conclusion is reached by linking
observation of cause and effect to draw
conclusion)
• In Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion
(1779), he said
» It is incorrect to move from stating that
everything in the universe has a cause to
the universe itself having a cause
» Challenged the idea that the universe has a
beginning. Why can it not go back to
infinity?
» Argues that even if accept that the universe
must have a cause there’s no solid ground
for this cause to be the Christian god, e.g. it
could be caused be a committee of divine
beings.
Immanuel Kant (1724-1804)
• Examined the argument of the existence
of a supreme being as a first cause of the
universe
• He argued the idea that every event must
have a first cause only applied to the world
of sense experience
• It cannot apply to something we have not
experienced
• He did not accept any justification for the
conclusion that God caused the universe
to begin
• He would not accept it as valid to extend
the knowledge we do possess to
questions that transcend our experience
• God would be a causal being outside
space and time as we understand it
• Therefore it would be impossible for
people to have any knowledge of what
God created or of God himself
The Radio Debate (1948)
• Between Frederick Copleston and
Bertrand Russell
• Copleston = Jesuit priest and professor at
Heythrop College
• Russell = British philosopher
• Copleston supported CA as evidence for
the existence of God
• Russell opposed it
• Debate focused on ‘Principle of Sufficient
Reason’
• Copleston said:
»There are some things in the world
that do not have in themselves the
reason or cause for their existence
»God is his own sufficient reason
»God is not contingent
• Russell said:
»He rejected the idea of contingency
and that there is a necessary being,
God, on which all things depend
»God as a necessary being would
have to be in a special category of his
own, so where does this special
category come from and why should
such a category be accepted?
»A ‘necessary being’ has no meaning
• Copleston replied:
»If Russell could talk of God in this
way, he understood the meaning of a
necessary being
• Russell stated:
»The universe does not have to have a
beginning. It could always have been
there and that was a brute fact
• The two never agreed!
What you need to do now
Read
Read
Read
Read
Read
Read
Essay
a) Explain the Cosmological Argument for
the existence of God (33)
b) ‘The Cosmological Argument is
unconvincing.’ Discuss (17)
Date due: Monday April 24th
Essay
• The Teleological Argument
a) Explain the main arguments for design
as presented by Aquinas and Paley. (33)
b) ‘Hume makes a more convincing case
than Paley.’ Discuss. (17)
Timed essay: Tuesday 2 May lunch time