What is the conclusion of the cosmological argument?
Conclusion: there must exist the necessary being that is the cause of the whole series of beings.
What are the two parts of the cosmological argument?
cosmological argument, Form of argument used in natural theology to prove the existence of God. Thomas Aquinas, in his Summa theologiae, presented two versions of the cosmological argument: the first-cause argument and the argument from contingency.
What are the three arguments for the existence of God?
There is certainly no shortage of arguments that purport to establish God’s existence, but ‘Arguments for the existence of God’ focuses on three of the most influential arguments: the cosmological argument, the design argument, and the argument from religious experience. What is the philosophy of religion?
What is Craig’s cosmological argument?
The Kalām Cosmological Argument is a 1979 book by the philosopher William Lane Craig, in which the author offers a contemporary defense of the Kalām cosmological argument and argues for the existence of God, with an emphasis on the alleged metaphysical impossibility of an infinite regress of past events.
What kind of argument is the cosmological argument?
A cosmological argument, in natural theology, is an argument which claims that the existence of God can be inferred from facts concerning causation, explanation, change, motion, contingency, dependency, or finitude with respect to the universe or some totality of objects.
What type of argument is the cosmological argument?
The cosmological argument is less a particular argument than an argument type. It uses a general pattern of argumentation (logos) that makes an inference from particular alleged facts about the universe (cosmos) to the existence of a unique being, generally identified with or referred to as God.
How does the cosmological argument prove the existence of God?
What is the cosmological theory?
Cosmology is a branch of astronomy that involves the origin and evolution of the universe, from the Big Bang to today and on into the future. Cosmologists puzzle over exotic concepts like string theory, dark matter and dark energy and whether there is one universe or many (sometimes called the multiverse).
Is cosmological argument deductive?
The cosmological argument is less a particular argument than an argument type. From these facts philosophers infer either deductively or inductively that a first cause, a necessary being, an unmoved mover, or a personal being (God) exists.
What are the strengths and weaknesses of the cosmological argument?
Terms in this set (9)
- Strength: It’s an ‘a posteriori’ argument.
- Strength: God is a simple explanation.
- Strength: Infinite regress is unlikely.
- Strength: It’s logical.
- Weakness: Inconsistent notion of necessary being.
- (Comeback) God is not bound by universal laws.
What does the cosmological argument state?