Zusammenfassung der Ressource
Weaknesses of the
cosmological
argument.
- Hume.
- Depends on the
existence of a
"necessary"
being.
- Hume rejects this
as he believes there
is no being that can
be inconceivable.
- He doesn't believe anything
caused the universe to
begin.
- It could be self
existing- perhaps it
always existed.
- If there is a 1st cause why
does it automatically lead to
the God of classic theism.
- Aquinas is guilty of
making an INDUCTIVE
LEAP.
- (Jumps to the
conclusion that
only God can fill
the first cause.
- Human beings
automatically make the
connection between cause
and effect.
- Bertrand Russell.
- Agreed
with Hume.
- The world is just
"BRUTE FACT".
- Some things (like the
universe) are just
there, and require no
explanation.
- It is not possible
to reach an
"adequate
explanation".
- Tyler and Reid.
- "The logic of the
premise does not
demand the
necessary
conclusion".
- General criticisms.
- How can God not have
a cause?
- What caused God?
- Isn't this an exception to
the argument's "rule"?
- The argument only works for
those who are satisfied that
God himself requires no
explanation.
- Can't the Big Bang
Theory be an explanation
in itself?
- Why can't there be
an infinite series of
causes?