OCR A-Level: Arguments based on observation - COSMOLOGICAL
Terms in this set (13)
A posteriori arguments
Arguments which draw conclusions from observation and experience
- Observed 5 ways to prove the world was of intelligent design. These ones make up the Cosmological Argument
1) First Way - Unmoved Mover
2) Second Way - Uncaused Causer
3) Third Way - Contingency
- Aquinas based his argument on 2 ideas:
1- The universe exists
2- There must be a reason why
The First Way
The Unmoved Mover
- Closely follows Aristotle
- Everything stays the same unless a force acts on it
- Can't have INFINITE REGRESSION therefore there has to be a first cause
- Dependency emphasised
The Second Way
The Uncaused Causer
- Every 'effect' has a 'cause'
- Aristotle's efficient cause
- Aquinas: God is the first efficient cause
The Third Way
- Everything on Earth is contingent
- If everything is contingent there needs to be something necessary that brings them into existence
- Famously supported Aquinas against a BBC debate against Russell in 1948
- Says the Cosmological Argument defines such a being that must (and cannot not) exist
- Cannot have infinite regression
- Created a form of Cosmological Argument based on his
PRINCIPLE OF SUFFICIENT REASON
--> there must be a reason as to why something exists/happens/is true
--> man has not been able to find reason for the universe within it, therefore it must be outside of it --> GOD
- Focuses on the wonder of there being anything in existence at all
- Nothing is a much more likely, logical state of affairs
- "A may be explained by B, and B by C, but in the end there will be some one object on whom all other objects depend"
--> Contingency of objects and reliance on necessary being (God)
Theories shouldn't be unnecessarily multiplied; the simplest one with the smallest number of assumptions will be true
- Rejects infinite regression
- Analogy of a train: Each carriage pulls the one behind it, but it wouldn't get anywhere without the engine.
--> engine = God
- Cosmological argument cannot stand alone for the proof of the existence of God
--> insufficient and would need more evidence
Criticises the Cosmological Argument
- Necessary being is incoherent
--> and why a God of Classical Theism
- Said Aquinas is guilty of an "inductive leap"
- If God can be a necessary being, why can't the universe?
- Argument works only if you assume God exists, but that is what is being proven; circular logic
- Argument moves from within human experience to beyond
- Developed Hume's points
- How can God not have a cause? Who caused God?
- Argument only sufficient for those satisfied that God himself requires no explanation
- Why can God be an explanation in himself but the big Bang cannot?
- Why can't there be infinite regression?
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE...
Arguments for the existence of God
CHAPTER 4 EXAM
Tran Unit 3 Test
Philosophy of Religion
OTHER SETS BY THIS CREATOR
Death and the Afterlife
OCR A-Level: Ancient Philosophical Influences
THIS SET IS OFTEN IN FOLDERS WITH...
OCR A-Level: Body, Mind, and Soul
OCR- Religious Studies- A level- Philosophy- Ancient philosophical influences
NHSG OCR A LEVEL RS - Arguments: Cosmological
OCR A-Level: Arguments Based on Reason - ONTOLOGICAL