1
Philosophy Revision
Theme 1 - Arguments for God’s existence
Cosmological Argument:
Intro:
● A posteriori and inductive argument - based off empirical evidence and observations of
the real world
● First theorised by Thomas Aquinas (Roman Catholic Priest) during the 13th century and
influenced by the works of Aristotle and Plato - written in his book Summa Theologica
● Wrote his book as an attempt to prove the existence of the God of classical theism
● Aquinas believed that everything happened is caused by something else - as everything
has a cause so must the universe. This cause is God
First way:
● The first way = ‘whatever is in motion was put in motion by another’
● As we know today (but not in Aquinas’ times) through scientific theories of the Big Bang
Theory and Red Shift that the universe is expanding and moving
● As everything in motion was put in motion by another, something must have caused the
world to come into existence
● There must be a mover who is unmoved (as there cannot be an infinite regress of
movers) and this must be God
● Only God being a transcendent being has the ability to move the potential into the actual
● E.g the wood has the potential to be lit on fire but requires someone to light it
● Aristotle - Sculptor and rock
Second way:
● Aquinas says that it is “necessary to admit a first efficient cause”
● Nothing can be the efficient cause of itself
● If the universe caused itself, it would create an infinite regress which is impossible as
time would cease to exist - this is logically absurd
● Therefore an efficient cause is required for the world that is uncaused - for Aquinas this
can only be God
Third way:
● Aquinas splits existence into 2 categories - contingency (relying on something else for
existence) or necessary existence (a being that always exists, always will exist and will
never not exist)
● Everything in the world is contingent including humans as the child relies on the parents
to be born, this means everything must have a start and an end being birth and death
● The world cannot be solely contingent as it could have easily never existed
● There must be a necessary being that exists outside of our contingent world that is
omnipotent and what all contingent beings rely on
, 2
● As we know the universe had a beginning and will have an end, the universe is
contingent so must rely on a necessary being - for Aquinas this is God
AO2: +
Ockham's razor:
+ “Entities shouldn’t be multiplied unnecessarily”
+ The simplest answer should be accepted as the answer
+ We are able to conclude that God is the uncaused cause/ unmoved mover so should
accept that God was the first cause of the universe
Leibniz’ Principle of Sufficient Reason:
+ We need explanations to explain why something exists
+ However we can’t have infinite regress because we would never get to a complete
explanation
+ God provides a sufficient explanation which doesn’t require an explanation
JL Mackie:
+ Analogy of the train: each carriage pulls another train carriage but none of them would
be able to pull another without the input of the front engine
+ This represents the first way - everything put in motion by another but requires God to do
so
+ God represents the engine
Kant:
- We can’t empirically prove God’s existence as we can’t make claims based on
something outside our realm of senses
- The idea of cause and effect only applies within our realm of senses
- Suggesting that God is the cause of the universe is nonsensical as it lies outside of our
realm of experience
Hume:
- Inductive leap = Aquinas uses an inductive leap in which the logic he uses in his
premises doesn’t lead logically to his conclusion
- He moves from establishing the need for an uncaused causer to stating that it must be
God
- Hume argues that we assume everything has a cause but we have no proof of this
B Russel:
- Even if specific things in the universe need an explanation, why does the universe need
an explanation as a whole
- Some things don’t require an explanation
- For the universe, it isn’t possible to reach an adequate explanation so shouldn’t be
attempted to explain
, 3
Teleological Argument:
Intro:
● Inductive, a posteriori argument - based off empirical evidence and observations of the
real world
● The design argument stems from the Latin word telos meaning goal
● Theorised by Thomas Aquinas, a 13th century classical philosopher in his book Summa
Theologica in the 5th way
● Popularised again in the 18th century by William Paley and in the 20th century by
modern philosopher Tennant
Aquinas:
● Introduced in the 5th way as the concept of governance using the design qua regularity -
everything in the world works together to achieve order - must be designed this way
● Aquinas states that all life forms were created with a purpose to survive and live which is
only capable of being given to by a more intelligent being which must be God
● Aquinas uses the analogy of the archer and the arrow - the arrow’s goal is to reach the
target but is only able to do so with the archer firing the arrow (the archer represents
God and the arrows being living organisms) - design qua purpose
Paley:
● Developed the watch analogy - looking at a watch, you can see the complexity and
intricacy of the parts all moving together to make the watch work. We know that there
must be a watchmaker as it couldn’t have been formed randomly
● Compared to the world, Paley explains that the only way the world became so complex
is due to an intelligent designer which must be God
● Paley uses design qua regularity to show the design e.g planet’s purpose is to orbit the
sun
Tennant:
● Anthropic principle = the world is so fine tuned that it must have been designed for
intelligent life as ‘random variation’ in natural selection isn’t enough to explain the
complexities of the world
● Aesthetic argument = because humans are able to enjoy entertainment such as art,
literature and music which are all not necessary for survival therefore natural selection
couldn’t have caused us all
● Tennant believed in the Goldilocks Theory in which the world is so perfect for life that it
couldn’t have happened by chance - e.g earth’s distance from the sun is the perfect
temperature for our bodies
Philosophy Revision
Theme 1 - Arguments for God’s existence
Cosmological Argument:
Intro:
● A posteriori and inductive argument - based off empirical evidence and observations of
the real world
● First theorised by Thomas Aquinas (Roman Catholic Priest) during the 13th century and
influenced by the works of Aristotle and Plato - written in his book Summa Theologica
● Wrote his book as an attempt to prove the existence of the God of classical theism
● Aquinas believed that everything happened is caused by something else - as everything
has a cause so must the universe. This cause is God
First way:
● The first way = ‘whatever is in motion was put in motion by another’
● As we know today (but not in Aquinas’ times) through scientific theories of the Big Bang
Theory and Red Shift that the universe is expanding and moving
● As everything in motion was put in motion by another, something must have caused the
world to come into existence
● There must be a mover who is unmoved (as there cannot be an infinite regress of
movers) and this must be God
● Only God being a transcendent being has the ability to move the potential into the actual
● E.g the wood has the potential to be lit on fire but requires someone to light it
● Aristotle - Sculptor and rock
Second way:
● Aquinas says that it is “necessary to admit a first efficient cause”
● Nothing can be the efficient cause of itself
● If the universe caused itself, it would create an infinite regress which is impossible as
time would cease to exist - this is logically absurd
● Therefore an efficient cause is required for the world that is uncaused - for Aquinas this
can only be God
Third way:
● Aquinas splits existence into 2 categories - contingency (relying on something else for
existence) or necessary existence (a being that always exists, always will exist and will
never not exist)
● Everything in the world is contingent including humans as the child relies on the parents
to be born, this means everything must have a start and an end being birth and death
● The world cannot be solely contingent as it could have easily never existed
● There must be a necessary being that exists outside of our contingent world that is
omnipotent and what all contingent beings rely on
, 2
● As we know the universe had a beginning and will have an end, the universe is
contingent so must rely on a necessary being - for Aquinas this is God
AO2: +
Ockham's razor:
+ “Entities shouldn’t be multiplied unnecessarily”
+ The simplest answer should be accepted as the answer
+ We are able to conclude that God is the uncaused cause/ unmoved mover so should
accept that God was the first cause of the universe
Leibniz’ Principle of Sufficient Reason:
+ We need explanations to explain why something exists
+ However we can’t have infinite regress because we would never get to a complete
explanation
+ God provides a sufficient explanation which doesn’t require an explanation
JL Mackie:
+ Analogy of the train: each carriage pulls another train carriage but none of them would
be able to pull another without the input of the front engine
+ This represents the first way - everything put in motion by another but requires God to do
so
+ God represents the engine
Kant:
- We can’t empirically prove God’s existence as we can’t make claims based on
something outside our realm of senses
- The idea of cause and effect only applies within our realm of senses
- Suggesting that God is the cause of the universe is nonsensical as it lies outside of our
realm of experience
Hume:
- Inductive leap = Aquinas uses an inductive leap in which the logic he uses in his
premises doesn’t lead logically to his conclusion
- He moves from establishing the need for an uncaused causer to stating that it must be
God
- Hume argues that we assume everything has a cause but we have no proof of this
B Russel:
- Even if specific things in the universe need an explanation, why does the universe need
an explanation as a whole
- Some things don’t require an explanation
- For the universe, it isn’t possible to reach an adequate explanation so shouldn’t be
attempted to explain
, 3
Teleological Argument:
Intro:
● Inductive, a posteriori argument - based off empirical evidence and observations of the
real world
● The design argument stems from the Latin word telos meaning goal
● Theorised by Thomas Aquinas, a 13th century classical philosopher in his book Summa
Theologica in the 5th way
● Popularised again in the 18th century by William Paley and in the 20th century by
modern philosopher Tennant
Aquinas:
● Introduced in the 5th way as the concept of governance using the design qua regularity -
everything in the world works together to achieve order - must be designed this way
● Aquinas states that all life forms were created with a purpose to survive and live which is
only capable of being given to by a more intelligent being which must be God
● Aquinas uses the analogy of the archer and the arrow - the arrow’s goal is to reach the
target but is only able to do so with the archer firing the arrow (the archer represents
God and the arrows being living organisms) - design qua purpose
Paley:
● Developed the watch analogy - looking at a watch, you can see the complexity and
intricacy of the parts all moving together to make the watch work. We know that there
must be a watchmaker as it couldn’t have been formed randomly
● Compared to the world, Paley explains that the only way the world became so complex
is due to an intelligent designer which must be God
● Paley uses design qua regularity to show the design e.g planet’s purpose is to orbit the
sun
Tennant:
● Anthropic principle = the world is so fine tuned that it must have been designed for
intelligent life as ‘random variation’ in natural selection isn’t enough to explain the
complexities of the world
● Aesthetic argument = because humans are able to enjoy entertainment such as art,
literature and music which are all not necessary for survival therefore natural selection
couldn’t have caused us all
● Tennant believed in the Goldilocks Theory in which the world is so perfect for life that it
couldn’t have happened by chance - e.g earth’s distance from the sun is the perfect
temperature for our bodies
