Skip to main content

The Cosmological Argument

The Cosmological Argument has two premises. The first part is deductively valid. It states that because every being is either a dependent being or a self-existing being and not every being can be a dependent being, then there must be a self-existing being or God. William Rowe, however, does make a point of saying that this doesn't necessarily make the claim that  there is a self- existing being true. But rather, if the premises were true then so too would the conclusion. Rowe also points out
the second premise doesn't account for the possibility of there being an infinite amount of dependent beings. However, according to Rowe, the proponents of this argument did recognize its fallacious nature. And, didn't assert that there had to be a first, creating member, but rather rejected that there was no explanation for the existence of dependent beings. So, although I again disagree with this argument, I find it more agreeable than the seven ways and also agree with the proponents feelings about the second premise.

Comments

  1. AnonymousSeptember 21, 2017 at 5:54 PM

    I do like the "logic" that Rowe incorporated into proving the existence of God. If you have A and B but it is not A then it is B or if the two premises are true then the conclusion is true. This is where I had to disagree with him because if we said, "Obama is the former president (A) and Michelle is his wife (B) therefore, Obama is God." The conclusion is false even though the premises is true. Also when Rowe states that we are human beings but collectively we are not human beings, this was the only thing I could agree with.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Seven Ways

Udayana states that there are seven ways to prove that God is in existence; effects, atomic combination, suspension, human skills, authoritative knowledge, Revelation, and atoms. He also calls Him the "all-knowing, imperishable God." He is imperishable God because he is the only one who could create atoms because humans are not able to. Also, humans can not break atoms or destroy them and he is stating that the only person that can do that is God because he created atoms. He mentions the difference between the cause and effect to validate if there is a God. He brings up the argument that "Things like the earth must have a cause, because they are produced by a body (101)." Some deity had to have made the earth for their pleasure. He also relies on objections to prove that God is real. Udayana does bring up good ideas to prove that God is real. The best argument to me is that he created atoms. Humans are unable to destroy atoms or to create them; so they had to be...
1 comment
Read more

The Five Ways

How can we justify the existence of God? Aristotle proposed an argument of an eternal universe and a temporary universe. He questions if the universe is one that has always been or one that is temporarily here for a moment in time. Many ponder the question and often go back and forth between answers, but nevertheless, many can agree that either way, the universe must have a cause or an overall creator and this is what St. Thomas Aquinas argues in, "The Five Ways." The five reasons are as follows: “The first and more manifest way is the argument from motion. It is certain and evident to our senses that some things are in motion.” Motion is caused by a movement of an object or person, but who does the initial movement? This is the question that must be answered. If there is motion, who is the mover? Who has created this cause and effect relationship? This leads us to the second reason of evidence: “The second way is from the formality of efficient causation.” Who started th...
2 comments
Read more

Is the Concept of Ultimate Reality Coherent

     Ultimate reality is dependent on a human beings's perspective. Ultimate reality, or the concept of God are compiled of different beliefs  and conceptual models. Questions are raised with  transcendent reality in  nature and existence. Chad Meister, addresses some of these questions. Humans desire to escape the suffering of this world with the faith and belief that another more perfect existence is obtainable where the flaws of this world does not exist (89). Wainwright states that from human beings needs and experiences came the concept of ultimate reality. Advaita Vedanta takes the Hinduism traditions of Upanishadic to interptet the concept of ultimate reality. Upanishadic traditions, such as the teaching of Brahman, could be traslated as ultimate reality. The world is simutaniously external and unchanging whole, and a individuated plurality that is constantly morphing or changing. Vedanta had taken up this particular insight and gives empahasis on th...
1 comment
Read more