How convincing is the Kalam argument as proof of the existence of Allah The first premise is relatively uncontroversial‚ and is rooted in the metaphysical principle that out of nothing‚ nothing comes. The denial of the first premise‚ although strictly logically possible‚ is metaphysically unactualizable. By definition‚ nothing has no potentialities. Thus‚ it is impossible for something to arise out of nothing‚ for how can its existence be actualized if the potential is not there? The truth of the
Premium Cosmological argument Universe Existence
------------------------------------------------- MY PERSONAL PHILOSOPHY ------------------------------------------------- IN GOD‚ MAN AND THE WORLD ------------------------------------------------- A Project Submitted To The Faculty of Philosophy Department In the College of Arts and Sciences of LPU ------------------------------------------------- Prof. Ms. Violeta G. Tabin ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------- In
Premium Philosophy Religion Faith
Explain Hume’s criticisms of the teleological argument (25 marks) Hume criticised the teleological argument in plenty of ways as he believed that the argument was deeply flawed. His first point criticised Paley’s analogy of the watch. The first part of the analogy claimed that if you found a rock while walking through a heath‚ you would not think anything of it. However‚ if you had seen a watch you would examine it and find that it had moving parts that demonstrate that the watch has a purpose
Premium Teleological argument David Hume Charles Darwin
The existence of God. The question that millions of people ask themselves each day is does God exist? What is God? Who is God? Throughout my life I have never questioned the existence of God; God just IS. However‚ there exists beings who need an explanation to how God can possibly exist as an eternal‚ all-powerful and all-knowing being. Through three different arguments‚ this paper examines some rational arguments for the existence of and eternal being‚ God. The first argument states that
Premium Existence God Ontology
backbone of all modern western civilization. The philosophy behind Natural Law demonstrates that humankind‚ as a species‚ knows certain things to be right and wrong‚ without any instruction. Humans know that many unjust things are wrong‚ it doesn’t need to be taught‚ it is a universal truth known to all‚ with very few exceptions. The Natural law has long been subject to debate of where its true origin is‚ whether it be from a divine source‚ in God and His grace‚ or an earthly source‚ from the evolution
Premium Natural law Law Plato
In Descartes’ Meditations On First Philosophy specifically the 6th Meditation’s 10th paragraph‚ Descartes goes through the process of‚ what he believes to be‚ proving the conclusion: That corporeal objects do exist. In this essay Descartes’ argument will be deconstructed into its premises‚ explaining those premises‚ reconstructing the argument‚ and lastly evaluation of the validity and soundness of his argument. Descartes begins his argument my stating his first premise‚ which is that he has the
Premium Mind
are having‚ or we are not dreaming all our experience of this world? When we dream we imagine things happening often with the same sense of reality as we do when we are awake. In Descartes dream argument‚ he states there are no reliable signs distinguishing sleeping from waking. In his dream argument‚ he is not saying we are merely dreaming all of what we experience‚ nor‚ is he saying we can distinguish dreaming from being awake. I think his point is we cannot be for sure what we experience as
Premium Perception Mind Sense
to it and Copernicus was working on calendar reform‚ which the church wanted‚ meaning the church left him alone until he was done with the calendar. So Copernicus wrote a book about his ideas. The book argued that the Earth revolved around the sun. God would surely find a simple heliocentric universe more pleasing than the complex Ptolemaic model‚ he wrote. Besides‚ Copernicus argued‚ the Pythagorean model‚ with all the rotating celestial spheres‚ wasn’t logical either. What makes more sense‚ that
Premium Heliocentrism Johannes Kepler Galileo Galilei
its reasoning and is not a convincing argument for one to believe in God‚ but it can be applicable to a catered category of people. Pascal’s Wagers main issue is that it is not an epistemic argument. Before just dismissing Pascal’s Wager as not an epistemic argument‚ one must understand what an epistemic argument is. An epistemic argument is an argument that must be rational‚ reasonable and justified in order to be believed. For instance‚ if one believes in God because one experienced a miracle and
Premium God Philosophy Faith
(1.a.) Clarke’s first argument is God’s existence as a sufficient infinite reality in Person and Being. The first step of Clarke’s argument is “given any conditioned being‚ there must exist at least one absolutely unconditioned‚ or self-sufficient being (Clarke 215).” Every living thing is conditioned‚ in that it requires a cause. We are all radically conditioned to exist and we depend on other things to keep us that way. Humans for example exist do to their parents and they keeping existing because
Premium Existence Metaphysics Ontology