The Cosmological Argumentative Analysis
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.
Rowe suggests that premise 2 “seems to be a necessary truth.” But it certainly is not if we take Clarke’s analysis of premise 1. If a living thing exists and it is not the case that something has always existed, then it does conclude that something has been produced out of nothing.
Rowe suggests that premise 2 “seems to be a necessary truth.” But it certainly is not if we take Clarke’s analysis of premise 1. If a living thing exists and it is not the case that something has always existed, then it does conclude that something has been produced out of nothing.