0
- The cosmological argument is no more than a poorly constructed premise that can mean what you want it to mean.
- The sometimes response, "Who made God?" may be simplistic, but it does highlight the question of why there is a noncontingent First Cause.
- An even greater problem for Christians, Muslims and Jews, is that if the cosmological argument were valid, it would equally prove the existence of Brahma, Ahura Mazda or any other creator god.
- For a scientist, the First Cause can quite validly be the Big Bang. Most scientists at least argue that "God" is not a scientifically proven cause
The cosmological argument can even be restated so as to prove that God need not exist:
- Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
- The Universe began to exist.
- Therefore, the Universe had a cause.
What else can I help you with?
Is there a statute limitations on traffic tickets in Tennessee?
Traffic tickets in Tennessee, once issued, do not have a statute of limitations. You have received timely notice of the violation.
What is the statued of limitations on traffic citation in pennsylivina?
The statutes of limitations on traffic citation in Pennsylvania may result in the suspension of your license and FTA warrant.
Is there a statute of limitations for unpaid tickets in Idaho?
In Idaho there is no statute of limitations once a ticket has been issued. You have been given proper notice of the violation.
What is the statute of limitations for traffic fines Ca?
In California there is no statute of limitations once a ticket has been issued. You have been given proper notice of the violation.
What was the whole argument between Cheryl Cole and Danni Minogue about?
There never was any argument in the series of the X Factor. The media just made it up.
When was The Kalām Cosmological Argument created?
The Kalām Cosmological Argument was created in 1979.
How many pages does The Kalām Cosmological Argument have?
The Kalām Cosmological Argument has 216 pages.
Is the big bang theory a strong challenge to the cosmological argument?
As far as I understand, the Big Bang theory is not a challenge to the cosmological argument at all. The cosmological argument states that there must have been a beginning to the universe, which is confirmed by modern science. The cosmological argument further is often held to indicate that that beginning must have been an intelligent agent, which is neither confirmed nor denied by cosmology.
What are facts about the cosmological argument?
The cosmological argument is a type of argument for the existence of God based on the idea that the universe must have a cause that originated it. It asserts that everything that begins to exist must have a cause, and since the universe began to exist, it must also have a cause. This argument has been debated for centuries by philosophers and theologians.
Is the cosmological argument valid?
The cosmological argument is a metaphysical argument for the existence of a first cause or necessary being that initiated the existence of the universe. Its validity depends on one's philosophical perspective and interpretation of causality and existence. Some find it compelling, while others criticize its assumptions and conclusions.
Who was one of the main proponents of the cosmological argument?
Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas. For additional supporters of this argument, check the corresponding Wikipedia article.
Who rejected the cosmological argument?
Many philosophers and thinkers have rejected the cosmological argument, including David Hume, Bertrand Russell, and J.L. Mackie. They have raised objections related to the assumptions of causality, the principle of sufficient reason, and the existence of an uncaused cause.
What is the difference between the cosmological theory and the cosmological argument?
Cosmological theory is a scientific theory . (It should be noted that a scientific theory differs greatly from common notions of what a theory is) . A cosmological theory takes scientific facts, raw data, evidence & logical argumentation & organizes it as an explanation of the cosmos ... The "argument" is purely philosophical in nature. It's origins are widely attributed a Muslim named Kalam in the Middle Ages. It sought to use the workings of the cosmos as a proof for the existence of a god. It positions a god as a kind of "first mover". However; the argument is weak & has been refuted on many levels. It's based on a misunderstanding of "cause & effect".
Why did hume reject the cosmological argument?
Hume rejected the cosmological argument because he believed that it relied on the assumption of a necessary being, which cannot be proven to exist. He also argued that there is no logical reason to assume that the universe must have a cause or explanation beyond itself.
What does the cosmological argument teach us about God?
It teaches that God has no beginning because he as always been there
What are the criticisms of cosmological argument?
Critics of the cosmological argument often argue that it does not necessarily point to the existence of a specific god or deity, and that it relies on the assumption that everything must have a cause without explaining what caused the initial cause. They also argue that the argument may not provide definitive proof of a god's existence and that it is based on premises that are not universally accepted.
Is the kalam cosmological argument sound or valid?
The kalam cosmological argument is considered by many philosophers and theologians to be both valid and sound. The argument uses logic to try to demonstrate that the universe had a cause and that this cause must be a transcendent, uncaused, and timeless being, which many identify as God. However, there is ongoing debate and criticism within the philosophical community about its premises and implications.
