1. Chapter 1: The cosmological argument AQA Religious Studies: Philosophy of Religion AS Level © Nelson Thornes Ltd 2008 Revision

2. Chapter 1 Revision What is the cosmological argument? AQA Religious Studies: Philosophy of Religion AS Level © Nelson Thornes Ltd 2008

3. Chapter 1 Revision The cosmological argument is also known as the First Cause argument. The starting point of the argument is observation of our world. These observations show that things move and change. Things are caused to happen as the result of how actions affect them. From our observations we can see that things come into existence and then cease to exist. However we do not live in an empty universe as there is always something existing in our world rather than nothing. The cosmological argument seeks to prove that the cause of the universe (cosmos) and all that is in it has a cause and that cause is God. AQA Religious Studies: Philosophy of Religion AS Level © Nelson Thornes 2008

4. Chapter 1 Revision  Aquinas’ First Way –What did Aquinas define with the words ‘the reduction of something from potentiality to actuality’? –What example did Aquinas provide to demonstrate this reduction? –Why does Aquinas argue for a Prime Mover instead of infinite regression? AQA Religious Studies: Philosophy of Religion AS Level © Nelson Thornes Ltd 2008

5. Chapter 1 Revision Aquinas defined motion with the words ‘the reduction of something from potentiality to actuality’ Aquinas used the example of fire making wood hot to demonstrate this reduction. Aquinas argues for a Prime Mover instead of infinite regression because if there was infinite regression there would be no first mover, and, consequently, no other mover. AQA Religious Studies: Philosophy of Religion AS Level © Nelson Thornes 2008

6. Chapter 1 Revision  Aquinas’ Second Way –Why does Aquinas say that nothing could be its own cause? –Why does Aquinas reject an infinite series of efficient causes? –How does Aquinas arrive at the conclusion that God is the first cause? –How is God different from other beings? AQA Religious Studies: Philosophy of Religion AS Level © Nelson Thornes Ltd 2008

7. Chapter 1 Revision Aquinas says that nothing could be its own cause, as this would mean that it would have had to exist before it existed. This would be a logical impossibility. Aquinas rejects an infinite series of efficient causes because no matter how many intermediate causes there are, a first and an ultimate cause must always exist. Aquinas arrives at the conclusion that the first cause must in itself be uncaused. God is uncaused. God is different from other beings as God is eternal, unmoved and uncaused. AQA Religious Studies: Philosophy of Religion AS Level © Nelson Thornes 2008

8. Chapter 1 Revision  Aquinas’ Third Way –What is a contingent being? –What is a necessary being? –What is necessary existence? AQA Religious Studies: Philosophy of Religion AS Level © Nelson Thornes Ltd 2008

9. ’Chapter 1 Revision A contingent being depends on an external cause for its own existence. A necessary being is a being with necessary existence to bring everything into existence. Necessary existence is not to have failed to exist, but to always exists. AQA Religious Studies: Philosophy of Religion AS Level © Nelson Thornes 2008

10. Chapter 1 Revision  How did Aquinas prove his third way for the existence of God? AQA Religious Studies: Philosophy of Religion AS Level © Nelson Thornes 2008

11. Chapter 1 Revision Aquinas proves his third argument for the existence of God based on the fact that the universe came into existence and that things in the universe come in and out of existence. Aquinas considered the possibility of infinite time. If time is infinite then there must have been a time when nothing existed. This is because of contingency; the very fact that things are contingent means that they cannot continue forever. If there were a time when nothing existed then there would still be nothing as nothing can bring itself into existence. Therefore the cause of the universe must be external to it and must always have existed. There must have been a ‘necessary being’, to bring everything else in to existence. Aquinas argued that this ‘necessary being’ was God. He concluded that if God did not exist then nothing would exist. AQA Religious Studies: Philosophy of Religion AS Level © Nelson Thornes 2008

12. Chapter 1 Revision What were the challenges to Aquinas’ cosmological argument of David Hume and Immanuel Kant? AQA Religious Studies: Philosophy of Religion AS Level © Nelson Thornes 2008

13. Chapter 1 Revision  The Challenges of David Hume - Hume argues as we have no experience of creating a universes we cannot talk about something we have not experienced. We cannot apply experiences from this world to something that we have not experienced. – Even if there is a cause of the universe we cannot know that it is the God of classical theism. It could be many gods or random chance. – There is no evidence that there is a beginning to the universe. ( Many scientists today argue we have the evidence with the Big Bang theory but still does not prove it was caused by God). - We do not know that a ‘necessary being’ exists. Just because people say that there is one does not make it so. AQA Religious Studies: Philosophy of Religion AS Level © Nelson Thornes 2008

14. Chapter 1 Revision  The Challenges of Immanuel Kant - Kant rejected the argument as he did not consider that there was any way of reasoning from finite events to a transcendent cause, (a being outside time and space and beyond human understanding) - Referring to a being with necessary existence is nonsense as we should only use ‘necessary’ for a priori statements (A priori statements are propositions on which truth rests on the statement itself: e.g. ‘2+2 = 4’ or ‘Quadrupeds have four legs’). AQA Religious Studies: Philosophy of Religion AS Level © Nelson Thornes 2008

15. Explain Copleston’s version of the Cosmological Argument AQA Religious Studies: Philosophy of Religion AS Level © Nelson Thornes 2008 Chapter 1 Revision

16. Copleston argued that only contingent beings are caused. Everything in the universe, including the universe itself is contingent, and is therefore dependent on something outside itself for its existence. This ‘something’ has to have necessary existence. God has necessary existence and is the explanation for his own existence. Therefore God must exist to have been the cause of the existence of the universe. AQA Religious Studies: Philosophy of Religion AS Level © Nelson Thornes 2008

17. Chapter 1 Revision How did Bertrand Russell challenge Copleston? AQA Religious Studies: Philosophy of Religion AS Level © Nelson Thornes 2008

18. Chapter 1 Revision Russell rejected the idea of contingency and that there was a necessary being, God, on which all things depend. God as a necessary being would have to be in a special category of His own. Russell raised the question from where does this special category come, and why should such a category be accepted. Russell argued that the idea of a ‘necessary being’ has no meaning. The universe does not have to have a beginning. It could always have been there and that was brute fact. As Russell stated: ‘I should say that the universe is just there, and that’s all’. Russell argued that just because we had a mother it does not mean that the universe did. AQA Religious Studies: Philosophy of Religion AS Level © Nelson Thornes 2008

19. Chapter 1 Revision Using the information contained in these slides and Chapter 1:the Cosmological Argument in the textbook AQA AS Religious Studies Philosophy of Religion – list the strengths and weaknesses of the cosmological argument. AQA Religious Studies: Philosophy of Religion AS Level © Nelson Thornes 2008

20. Chapter 1 Revision What is the value of the cosmological argument to religious faith?

21. Chapter 1 Revision Natural theology is the name given to the use of reasoned argument to provide a basis in reason for believing in God. It could be argued that the cosmological argument would provide such a basis. When added to the other arguments for the existence of God then the reasons for believing in God are strengthened. Such arguments simply support people’s already existing belief in God. They have faith that God exists. This view has become known as fideism, which argues that faith cannot be tested by using rational enquiry. AQA Religious Studies: Philosophy of Religion AS Level © Nelson Thornes 2008

22. Chapter 1 Revision Prepare an answer for the following question that is to be answered under timed conditions. (a)Explain the cosmological argument of Aquinas and Copleston. (30) (b) Assess how far the cosmological arguments of Aquinas and Copleston show that it is reasonable to believe in God. (15) AQA Religious Studies: Philosophy of Religion AS Level © Nelson Thornes 2008