Cosmological Argument

William Paley was a well known theologian in the 19th century responsible for surmising the existence of “an intelligent creator by design.” His argument, built up to and stated on page 29, Chapter III, paragraph 1 in sentence 1 is as follows: “for every indication of contrivance, every manifestation of design, which existed in the watch, exists in the works of nature”. Before diving into the meaning behind this, there are terms to be defined. By contrivance, Paley means artificiality, or to have been made. A watch, as easy as it is to grasp, is simply the mechanism on your wrist that tells you the time of day.

Paley simply responds to this by saying that something doesn’t have to perfect to show that there was a designer. Another problem with this argument is that things in a watch (or a universe) contain different parts that look like they have no function, so these parts are somewhat proof that he universe wasn’t designed. Paley replies to this by saying that just because we do not know the function of something it doesn’t mean that it has no function, Paley looks at different parts of the watch (or universe) and from this he decides that it must have been

I think William Lane Craig made a strong argument when it came to a cosmological argument. He does have a point that there is an explanation of how the world came to be but there is more to it, such as dates and things like that. He says that the ultimate question in philosophy would be “why does anything exists”? He brings up that atheist think that the universe is eternal but he says there is reasons why the universe began. He says its obscured to think that its number of past events is infinite, which he says leads to self-contradictions.

Faith is the root of many actions and thereby reactions in our society, and world today. These religious practices must go through many trials and questionings from the always cynical, ever searching individuals. Due to the questioning of God’s existence, St. Thomas Aquinas and Anselm devised three arguments as was of explanation for His existence. Ontological, cosmological and teleological arguments are put forth to hopefully one day prove God’s existence. We are a people who crave for simplicity, there is nothing simple about the devout in their faith, we will look to find simpler explanations, or Ockham’s razor, for the three arguments put forth by Aquinas and Anselm.

84). Thus if something being unable to cause itself means there is a first cause, which must necessarily be God that causes the universe. Goldstein’s argument instead argues that since the universe cannot cause itself (Premise 4), something outside universe must have caused the universe to exist. Goldstein’s framework is far weaker, particularly after her 4th premise, as it falls into a range of fallacies and presumptions. Indeed Goldstein’s framing reads as a simplification of the cosmological argument designed to be easier to criticised.

Of the three main styles of arguments for the existence of God – the cosmological, the teleological, and the ontological – the teleological is probably the second strongest of these arguments. The teleological argument is also the only one of these arguments that reasons to its conclusion inductively. This means that, unlike the cosmological and ontological arguments, the acceptance of the premises of the teleological argument does not commit you to the acceptance of its conclusion. It only commits you to a judgement about the probability of the conclusion. The style of reasoning typically adopted by this method is one that starts from a posteriori observations about our reality, and then reasons a priori – typically through analogy – to the

The Cosmological Argument is an a priori argument, seeking to establish the existence of a self-existent being through the Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR), in order to then attempt to prove that that self-existent being is the “theist God” (48). In the Cosmological Argument, philosophers argued that the world’s foundation is based on the implicit relationship we have with the world and one another. Their arguments can be epitomized below: (a) Every being (that exists or ever did exist) is either a dependent being or a self-existent being. (b) Not every being can be a dependent being.

The so called Transcendental argument which is an argument which states that x is a necessary condition for y to be present so based on this philosophy, there is a God and if there was not a God, we would not be here and if there was not a God we couldn’t figure out anything at all. Why because there is nothing greater than God himself. Anything created had to come from someone or something greater than the person him or herself that was created by, a designer. Example like a child building something from Legos.

The Cosmological Argument argues that the universe had to have been created by something greater, and more powerful than itself, such as God. This argument contends that the first cause of anything has no cause itself. The Teleological Argument asserts that the complex design of the world proves an intelligent, powerful creator. The Moral Argument cites God’s existence as the cause of morality. This argument asserts that humans follow moral laws that must have been created by a law giver.

Personally, I believe the conclusion of the transcendental argument for the existence of God. In my opinion, Immanuel Kant is more credible because he created the argument and supported it using many examples, whereas Michael Martin only found errors with the TAG. I agree with Kant because this theory is a cause and effect, meaning that God’s existence caused human reason. In Critique of Pure Reason, Kant states that logic originates from an individual’s belief in God. If someone believes that God created the world, then He is the reason why the laws of logic exist.

God was necessary for the world to be created, and thus was created from nothing. He is the

According to William Paley’s argument in “The Teleological Argument" everything was created for a specific purpose. Paley uses the watch and mentions its maker to compare the creation of the world and God. In order to explain why certain objects have a specific design and purpose, Paley uses the watch to develop this idea. According to Paley, the watch has many intricate parts which contribute not only to the overall design but to the overall function of the watch. This can be compared to God and how he created each individual to serve a purpose.

The argument for and against the existence of god has been proposed by our great philosophers for so many years. cosmological argument makes an effort to prove that the god is exists by showing that there cannot be a boundless number of throwback causes to things that exist. Existence of god began with Plato and Aristotle who made arguments that would be classify as cosmological. As I believe the existence of god cannot be verified or unconfirmed. Every effect must have a motivation.

Argument for the existence of god is being proposed in several ways. Some based on science while some are about personal experience and some on philosophical arguments such as ontological arguments, first cause arguments, arguments based on deign, moral arguments. Each of these support conception. Ontological argument say that if you inculcate the idea of god , we can see him . There is a saying that “Nothing comes from Nothing but something comes from something”.

Anselm famously associated with the “ontological argument” for the existence of God. Anselm, in Proslogion, coined the term “ontological” to describe a branch of philosophy that deals with the notion of “being or existence.” (McGrath & OverDrive, Inc. 2001 p. 181). Proslogion is a work of meditation, not of logical argument.