Preview

Richard Taylor's Cosmological Argument

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1202 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Richard Taylor's Cosmological Argument
The question of the creation of earth and the creation of all living things that comprise the earth has begged an answer since the beginning of the philosophical era. Philosophers often turn to the cosmological argument to justify the existence of God, and turn to the metaphysical basis to explain religious beliefs. This essay will analyze the “cosmological argument” as presented by Richard Taylor, in order to critically evaluate its meaning and understand its claims.
To begin, the argument stems upon a metaphysical interpretation of creation. Despite the fact that religion may be a matter of faith rather than reason, many philosophical thinkers wonder if it may be a matter of reason; and something that can be demonstrated along with believed.
…show more content…
A necessary truth is one that depends on nothing to be true, such as the fact that the stone in question has a form, which is contingent on nothing but itself to be true. Taylor states that there must be an answer as to why the world exists rather than not, and whether or not its existence is contingent or necessary (Taylor 103.) Furthermore, creation itself means dependence, even in Christian theology (Taylor 102). If the earth is a creation, then it must depend on something. Every dependent thing has an explanation for its existence. Hence, all contingent things have an explanation for their existence. This explanation cannot be a contingent being, because the creator of the creation must be infinite in existence. Therefore, there is a necessary being, which we refer to as God, the creator of the heaven and earth. The world must depend on something, otherwise there would no reason why it exists at all, and every contingent truth must have a reason for existence. Furthermore, it is implausible that the world exists by itself because we find nothing in it to suggest that it exists by its own nature. However, many things suggest that it does not (Taylor 103). First of all, anything …show more content…
Taylor states, “Belief in the gods seems to have its roots in human desires and fears, particularly those associated with self-preservation.”(Taylor 99). The unknown, or lack of knowledge where humans come from, whether or not their lives are necessary or contingent, and when and how they will die, are all things that arise fear in humans. This is related to the cosmological argument because it dictates that God is purely necessary and our fate is in his hands. For those that believe in God, it provides them answers and gives them assurance that they will die according to him and not at some random time. Which, in itself, may seem like no answer at all, but it gives humans the belief that their lives are not simply a means of probability. In this way, I believe that metaphysical conclusions to religious questions are related to simple belief in God, without consideration of reason. Taylor’s recollection of the cosmological argument begs the fundamental question as to why the universe exists. Everything on this planet is contingent on another thing. Living things are contingent on oxygen, for example. The argument also seems to state that it is not the mere existence of the things around us that needs explanation, but, it is the contingent existence of it all, the what-if it-didn’t exist aspect. Why does a universe

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Consistently from the dawn of human existence, the idea of “God”, or simply the questions of the place from whence the human body has come from forced any individual to consider the religious value or idea of God regarding God’s responsibility for every piece of matter in which makes up life. One of the most critical arguments that claim that there must be a God is the Kalem Cosmological argument, which uses the universe’s mere existence or the beginning of the universe’s existence to claim that whatever has a beginning, must have a cause, insinuating that the cause of the universe’s beginning is in theory, God. Though with creative intellect in further questioning it’s impossible for one not to question that the Cosmological argument may be correct in theory, but does the cause of the universe have to be God? Throughout this paper, I’ll be focusing on the argument that God’s existence does not have to be the direct cause of the begging of the universe, nor does the cosmological argument actually prove the existence of God for that matter.…

    • 644 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    We are looking for evidence god exists, so we turned to an evidential argument in favor of God: the cosmological argument.…

    • 566 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    This argument has been subject to great applause through the religious community for its simplistic and impactful articulation. However the cosmological argument is also opposed by atheists who fail to find substance and empirical evidence within its core.…

    • 1677 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    I think that in reading the article we can relate to McCloskey in some of his concerns. One can question is the most relatable, the idea that God exist and so does evil. Personally, I have wondered why God would allow such troublesome times upon those who ultimately do not deserve to receive them. I think it is normal as a Christian to question faith in God from time to time. When my daughter was sick recently, I remember asking God a hundred times why? What did she do to deserve such things? However, it is important to note that while we may question God for his reasons as to why certain things may occur, we do not ultimately rule out the fact that he exist entirely. I think that McCloskey had a few of his ideas on the correct path, but he failed to recognize that the arguments presented were just the most basic outline to the question of God’s existence. The teleological and cosmological arguments should be used as starting points and not as the ending arguments to the question. God is not defined, but he is always present and powerful. One should realize that there is only so much knowledge available at hand, and we can only debate so far with what we know. I would argue to McCloskey that I find greater comfort in the knowledge that there is indeed a God, and we are not just the products of some uncontrolled chaos. I choose to believe that God regulates the…

    • 1548 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The cosmological argument argues the existence of God since there had to be a creator of all things in nature that depend on something else for their existence. McCloskey’s idea is that the existence of the universe is not enough to confirm the existence of God. An argument that can be used against this statement is the non-temporal form of the cosmological argument. In the book “Philosophy of Religion” by Evans and Manis, the non-temporal form has three components. First there is some contingent beings exist (Evans and Manis, 69). The second component is that if any contingent being exist then a significant being must exist (69). Third, there must be the existence of a significant being (69). Furthermore, the cause of the universe is necessary because is important because without that development then there would be not existence of the contingent beings. Another claim by McCloskey is that the cosmological argument “does not entitle us to postulate an all-powerful, all-perfect, uncaused cause”; this statement is not necessarily true. Since the world around McCloskey does exist there must be an ultimate creator who created the universe and this creator is…

    • 484 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In February of 1968, H. J. McCloskey’s published an article called, “On Being an Atheist.” In this, he argues that atheism is a more comfortable, logical and realistic than theism. He mentions the evil that is in the world and how it doesn’t make any sense to find comfort in a God that purposely causes pain, disease and natural disasters. McCloskey also mentions it is unreasonable to live by faith in this world. In this article, he argues the three theistic proofs including, the argument for design, the teleological argument and the cosmological argument.…

    • 1490 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    ‘Why is there something rather than nothing?’ Assess whether the existence of the universe requires God as a first cause?…

    • 1355 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The cosmological argument for the existence of God. .... The first thing to note about the cosmological argument is that it is A Posteriori. ....…

    • 450 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    In The Cosmological Argument Premise 2 explains that everything cannot be a dependent living thing. William Rowe explains why the Principle of Sufficient reason is true, then premise 2 is also true. Rowe suggests that there has never been a self-existing living thing, but only an infinite series of dependent living things. In this case, every living thing has an explanation, because it is explained if a living thing that came before it then that caused its existence.…

    • 247 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Response Paper

    • 1586 Words
    • 5 Pages

    In 1968, a article was published by a man named H.J. McCloskey called “On Being an Atheist”, in which an attempt to present arguments against the existence of God is made. In his work, McCloskey attempts to provide readers with the argument that atheism is more “reasonable and comfortable (McCloskey,1968)” compared to the alternative theistic view. In his article, McCloskey attempts to make arguments against the three typical theistic proofs of God which includes the cosmological and teleological arguments, along with the argument from design. McCloskey uses the existence of evil and the irrationalness off faith against the theistic view of God. At the beginning of the article it seems that an intriguing argument will be made regarding the theistic view point of God, yet as McCloskey continues the argument becomes more biased in attacking spiritual beliefs which questions his validity.…

    • 1586 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    In fact McCloskey places the bar even lower by referring to the “proofs of” rather than “arguments for” God’s existence, thereby overstating the Theist’s claim. With respect to the “proofs” for God’s existence that McCloskey attempts to deal with, namely the Cosmological and Teleological Arguments, McCloskey offers trivial objections that are easily answered. With respect to arguments for God’s non-existence, McCloskey offers the logical form of the problem of evil which, while rich in rhetoric, does not contain enough logic to necessitate its title. McCloskey ends his article with a pragmatic justification of Atheist, stating that Atheism is more comforting that Theism; a point that is stark in its irrelevance.…

    • 2161 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    The cosmological argument proves the existence of God. It discusses contingent beings which exist, but could not have existed and necessary beings which exist and could not not exist. The cosmological says that there is a contingent being that exists. The existence of a contingent being must have a cause and the contingent being cannot be the cause of itself. The complete cause of a contingent being includes only other contingent beings or it includes a necessary being. Contingent beings alone cannot be the complete cause of a contingent being. The complete cause of a contingent being must include a necessary being. Therefore, a necessary being must exist. The cosmological argument shows that there must be a higher power, and that higher power is God. Everything that exists on earth is a contingent being. There is no person or animal that is not contingent. But what created everything to begin with if a contingent being cannot be the only cause of another contingent being? Everything on earth has a cause, but there must be a necessary being being that caused the Earth. There has to be something other than contingent beings. There has to be a necessary being that started everything. That necessary being is…

    • 1190 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Cosmological Argument

    • 559 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The cosmological argument for God’s existence differs from both the scriptural and ontological arguments in the way in which humans created it. Rather than looking at logical arguments or religious texts, the cosmological argument was derived because of humanity’s ability to project their need for cause onto the world. The cosmological argument is centered on the way in which we, humans in general, perceive there to be a need for a God due to the existence of the world around us.…

    • 559 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Cosmological Argument

    • 1211 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The cosmological argument is a philosophical argument in favor of the existence of God based on looking at evidence in the world around us. The arguments aim to persuade us that its conclusion is reasonable. But what is the conclusion that the cosmological wants us to accept? The argument wants us to accept that the cause of the universe is what we call God. From the existence of the world or universe to the existence of a being that brought it into and keeps it in existence.…

    • 1211 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The Riddle of Existence

    • 1001 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Because of the complexity of answering such a very simply question, one is tempted to ignore it or easily discard it as unanswerable. It is even easier to say that “there is something, rather than nothing” because we exist; or Wittgenstein’s later response to it – ‘it is nonsense’[1], we cannot imagine non-existence or absolute nothingness. Some solve it by an ‘end-all-be-all” answer – God[2]. Some rejects the question as it is, apparently, illegitimate and illogical; it is simply impossible to answer the question because its structure prevents us to do so[3]. However, we see that these propositions did not actually dismiss it. Thus, the question may still be answerable.…

    • 1001 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays