• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Examine the key features of the cosmological argument for the existence of God St Thomas Aquinas, an influential philosopher, invented the cosmological arguments in the 13th Century

Extracts from this document...


Examine the key features of the cosmological argument for the existence of God St Thomas Aquinas, an influential philosopher, invented the cosmological arguments in the 13th Century. He wrote them as part of his 'five ways' in his book 'Summa Theologica' however it was only the first three of these which are known as the cosmological argument, these are; the unmoved mover, the uncaused causer and the possibility and necessity. They are all posteriori synthetic inductive arguments, therefore they are based on proofs drawn from experience. The first of these three ways is the unmoved mover. Aquinas realised that everywhere we look things change state. When this occurs the object has moved from potentially changing to actually changing, however something must have caused this movement. Aquinas decided that there must be a first mover to cause this change, which he described as God. He realised that nothing can move itself, as nothing can be a mover and be moved; yet things are obviously in motion. He decided that an infinite chain of movers was imposable because it would have no beginning therefore no first mover. Aquinas therefore concluded that there must therefore be a first mover that caused motion in all things and this is God. Aquinas therefore believed that the 'unmoved mover' proved the existence of God because he believed e must be the initiator of all things. ...read more.


All of these theories give evidence to Aquinas' theory that God exists. For what reasons have some thinkers rejected the cosmological argument? How far is it possible to regard the cosmological argument as a strong argument? The cosmological theories are an inductive set of arguments. They answer key unexplained questions about the origins of the universe and are flexible with more then on conclusion and ways to reach this conclusion. Theses are just a few of the key strengths of the argument. It also uses evidence to prove it theory and reaches a conclusion that God is the only adequate and sensible explanation of the universe. The theory is clear and accepted by many, however there are also many who criticise it. Reasons for these criticisms could be the lack of interest of some people to find answers of the origins of the universe and the fact that many atheists believe they have found alternative explanations to the universe, which does not include God. Many people have also described Aquinas as having made a 'leap of logic' to conclude the existence of God and science has suggested alternative theories about the universe. All of these criticisms weaken the cosmological argument. David Hume is one of the main thinkers who reject the cosmological argument. He questioned weather the universe needs a cause. Although he agreed with Aquinas that everything within the universe has a cause he did not conclude that the universe itself therefore must have a cause. ...read more.


Russell however disagreed with Copleston, as he believes that the universe is without reason and its existence is a mere fact. He famously stated 'I should say that the universe is just there, and that's all'. Russell also agrees with Hume and believes that Aquinas made a leap of logic. He rejects his cosmological argument and he denies that the universe needs an explanation for its existence. However not all people share Russell's lack of curiosity, therefore the cosmological argument offers a theory to those who disagree that the universe is simply a fact. Modern science however can be used to strengthen and weaken Aquinas' cosmological theory. It can be seen as supporting the argument due to the 'big bang' theory which agrees that there was a time when the universe did not exist making it finite. However some other scientists argue that the big bang wasn't the beginning of the universe, instead it was another step in the series of expanding and contracting oscillating universe. Science has also observed particles which had appeared and disappeared without an apparent cause, proving that not everything has a cause as Aquinas stated in premise one of the uncaused causer. Supporters of Aquinas argue however that these particles do have a cause, it simple hasn't been made clear yet. To conclude many philosophers and great minds have rejected the cosmological argument, this questions the strengths that the argument has. However the argument can still be seen as strong due to it offering a straightforward and sensible conclusion to the origins of the universe. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text


Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Existence of God essays

  1. The Strengths and Weaknesses of the Cosmological Argument

    However, one could argue about questioning beyond God and involving infinite regress. The philosopher J.L. Mackie criticized the Cosmological argument because he wanted to question beyond God; why does God have to be the final conclusion? Another school of thought could argue that the so called prime mover wasn't God

  2. Identify the main strengths of the Cosmological Argument

    This relates to the theory of a Necessary being. Lane Craig said, "God did ex nihilo" when creating the world, so without God nothing would exist. Many of these scholars such as Aquinas took big leaps into linking God into the picture.

  1. The Cosmological Argument

    This first cause was itself uncaused. This first cause is God. Aquinas' idea rests here on the ideas of contingency and necessity. He claims that everything is contingent; everything relies on something else for its existence. However, not everything can be contingent, or nothing would have started in the first place; thus something is needed (necessary)

  2. &amp;quot;Discuss critically religious and secular ethical arguments about environmental issues&amp;quot;

    The final ancient philosophy of China is probably the best known - Buddhism often refers to nature and its importance; the Buddha himself became enlightened whilst sitting beneath a tree, and was born and died amongst nature. Similar to these philosophies, many indigenous ethical systems are not as anthropocentric as

  1. Using Inductive and Deductive arguments, is it possible to prove the existence of God?


  2. Frederick Copleston and Bertrand Russell's and their responses to the Cosmological argument.

    Therefore, the universe had a beginning. I see no difficulty with a Being that exists outside of time, causing effects in time, just as concepts like pain can cause material effects like tears.

  1. The Existence of God - questions and answers.

    There can always be natural explanations for a prayer appearing to be answered, and if there can be a natural explanation, then answered prayers cannot prove that God exists. 1. a) What is free will? Free will is an idea that human beings are free to make their own choices b)

  2. Explain how Thomas Aquinas attempts to prove the existence of God.

    Thus, there must be something that has of itself its own necessity, which to Aquinas is God.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work