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.
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
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