phil 1000 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Phil 1000 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Phil 1000

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 13

Phil 1000 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 184 Views
  • Uploaded on

Phil 1000. Bradley Monton Class 2 The Cosmological Argument. Three arguments for and one argument against the existence of God. The ontological argument The cosmological argument The argument from design The problem of evil. The Ontological Argument.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Phil 1000' - heriberto


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
phil 1000

Phil 1000

Bradley Monton

Class 2

The Cosmological Argument

three arguments for and one argument against the existence of god
Three arguments for and one argument against the existence of God
  • The ontological argument
  • The cosmological argument
  • The argument from design
  • The problem of evil
the ontological argument
The Ontological Argument

Premise 1: God is the being than which nothing greater can be conceived.

Premise 2: If a being exists in the understanding alone (and not in reality), then a being which is greater than it can be conceived.

Conclusion:God does not exist in the understanding alone -- God exists in reality.

gaunilo s objections
Gaunilo’s Objections

Note that Gaunilo believes in God -- he’s critiquing the argument, not the conclusion.

Gaunilo presents an argument by analogy: he presents a bad argument with ostensibly the same structure as Anselm’s argument.

slide5
Premise 1:Kokomo is the island than which no greater island can be conceived.

Premise 2: If an island exists in the understanding alone (and not in reality), then an island which is greater than it can be conceived.

Conclusion:Kokomo does not exist in the understanding alone -- Kokomo exists in reality.

kant s objection
Kant’s Objection

The ontological argument treats existence as a property -- it’s one of the properties that’s needed for maximal greatness.

But Kant says that that’s the wrong way to think of existence.

another objection
Another Objection

The ontological argument implicitly assumes it’s possible for God to exist.

But suppose that’s not possible; suppose that the very concept of God is self-contradictory.

Then it would follow from the premises of the argument that God exists …

but it would also follow that God doesn’t exist.

now the cosmological argument
Now, the Cosmological Argument

One version:

Premise 1: The universe began to exist.

Premise 2: Everything that begins to exist has a cause of its existence.

Conclusion: The universe had a cause of its existence.

Further step: this cause is God.

a different cosmological argument
A Different Cosmological Argument

Premise 1: Whatever is caused to exist is caused to exist by something else.

Premise 2: It’s impossible to have an infinite regress of (non-temporal) causes resulting in the existence of something.

Conclusion: There must have been a first cause.

a third cosmological argument
A Third Cosmological Argument

Leibniz -- the Principle of Sufficient Reason: there has to be a sufficient reason for everything that occurs.

Even if the universe has been in existence forever, and even if there is an infinite regress of causes, nevertheless there must be a sufficient reason for the universe to exist, and that chain of causes to exist.

That sufficient reason is God.

slide11
This leads to a question: what is the sufficient reason for God’s existence?

Maybe the answer is: God necessarily exists.

A further question: is the principle of sufficient reason true?

slide12
Rowe’s counterargument:

Rowe says that contingent facts can’t be explained by a necessary fact.

Therefore, an appeal to God can’t explain why the universe is this (contingent) way, and not some other way.

But is the will of God a sufficient reason?