Philosophical Arguments For The Existence Of God
Evaluate the arguments for the existence of god
There are three main philosophical arguments for the existence of god; the Teleological argument (also known as the design argument), made by William Paley, which presents the central idea that the universe is so complex, perfectly designed and purposeful that it must have had an intelligent designer, the Cosmological argument, made by Thomas Aquinas, which is based on the main idea that everything has a starting point so an uncaused god must have made/caused the universe, and the (entirely a priori) Ontological argument, made by Anselm, based on the main idea that god is perfect, and that existence is a predicate of perfection so therefore God must be real both in our minds and reality as he …show more content…
In addition, this argument demands that God is a necessary being to cause the universe (which leads it to become partly an a priori argument of reason rather than experience). Over years, various people added to the cosmological argument. Subsequently, variations of the argument came to be, the most popular being the Kalam cosmological argument, and the argument for contingency. the argument was supported largely by a statement made by philosopher Epicurus who stated: "Something obviously exists now, and something never sprang …show more content…
This destabilizes the entire argument, and philosophers and scientists both agree that proving cause and effect would be difficult. However, if we were to discard the principle of cause and effect then we would also be destabilising the theory science itself, which is based on succession of events.
Unlike the first two arguments, the Ontological argument is entirely a priori, meaning it is based off reason alone rather than containing at least elements of a posteriori (experience). The argument demands that God is perfect, that existence is a predicate of perfection (which is criticised by Russel, who suggests the word existence is used incorrectly in this instance, but otherwise supports the argument), and through this suggests that God must be real in both our minds and in reality to be the greatest conceivable
There are three main philosophical arguments for the existence of god; the Teleological argument (also known as the design argument), made by William Paley, which presents the central idea that the universe is so complex, perfectly designed and purposeful that it must have had an intelligent designer, the Cosmological argument, made by Thomas Aquinas, which is based on the main idea that everything has a starting point so an uncaused god must have made/caused the universe, and the (entirely a priori) Ontological argument, made by Anselm, based on the main idea that god is perfect, and that existence is a predicate of perfection so therefore God must be real both in our minds and reality as he …show more content…
In addition, this argument demands that God is a necessary being to cause the universe (which leads it to become partly an a priori argument of reason rather than experience). Over years, various people added to the cosmological argument. Subsequently, variations of the argument came to be, the most popular being the Kalam cosmological argument, and the argument for contingency. the argument was supported largely by a statement made by philosopher Epicurus who stated: "Something obviously exists now, and something never sprang …show more content…
This destabilizes the entire argument, and philosophers and scientists both agree that proving cause and effect would be difficult. However, if we were to discard the principle of cause and effect then we would also be destabilising the theory science itself, which is based on succession of events.
Unlike the first two arguments, the Ontological argument is entirely a priori, meaning it is based off reason alone rather than containing at least elements of a posteriori (experience). The argument demands that God is perfect, that existence is a predicate of perfection (which is criticised by Russel, who suggests the word existence is used incorrectly in this instance, but otherwise supports the argument), and through this suggests that God must be real in both our minds and in reality to be the greatest conceivable