The Cosmological Argument Notes
The cosmological argument is an argument that looks at the world searching for evidence of
Gods existence. The argumengts are known as Aquinas’ first three ways of the five. The first
way is motion, the second is from causation and the third is from contingency.
The First Way: Motion
We can see from observation that objects are in motion, but they cannot cause their own
motion. For example a childs roundabout cannot move itself and will be brought into
motion by someone pushing it. Before they move these objects have the potential to move ,
but are not actually in motion. Only other objects that are already in motion ( in a state of
actuality) can cause their motion. Some other motion in a state of actuality must cause the
motion of a potentially moving object. But the motion of the object in actuality also cannot
be caused by itself, this leads to infinite regression. But Aquinas argued that infinite
regression is impossible and there must be some unmoved object that is the cause for
everything else, this unmoved mover is God. The object in motion does not have to actually
be in physical motion but needs to have the potential to move into actuality. Aquinas gives
the example of a piece of wood, this piece of wood has the potential to be hot but needs
fire in order to cause it to go into the state of hot (actuality).
Criticisms of the first way:
1. Anthony Kenny has claimed that Aquinas first way of motion goes against Newtons
first law of motion.
2. Aquinas claim that something can be made X only by something that is X can be
proven false. For example with his example of the wood becoming hot using fire,
wood can become hot by two pieces of wood being rubbed together to cause fire.
The second Way: Causation
Everything has an efficient cause and this cause also has a cause of its existence. Nothing
can be the efficient cause of itself as causes are prior to effects and nothing can be prior to
itself. An infinite regress is impossible, as, if there were no first cause there would be no
contrary causes and therefore no effects in the world and this is contrary to our experience.
The series of caused causes implies an uncaused cause and this first uncaused cause is God.
We can use the example of Dominos here, we may see the last domino topple over and
follow these dominos right back to try and find the first domino, even if we cannot stretch
that far back does not mean we assume there was not a first domino.
Criticisms of the second way:
1. God may be dead, perhaps there was once an unmoved mover but whos to say that
entity still exists. Aquinas assumes Gods continued existence but not argued for it.
The third way: Contingency
Aquinas argues that things are contingent, a contignet being is one that relies on something
else to exist, just as plants rely on water and sunlight to grow. If everuything is contingent
The cosmological argument is an argument that looks at the world searching for evidence of
Gods existence. The argumengts are known as Aquinas’ first three ways of the five. The first
way is motion, the second is from causation and the third is from contingency.
The First Way: Motion
We can see from observation that objects are in motion, but they cannot cause their own
motion. For example a childs roundabout cannot move itself and will be brought into
motion by someone pushing it. Before they move these objects have the potential to move ,
but are not actually in motion. Only other objects that are already in motion ( in a state of
actuality) can cause their motion. Some other motion in a state of actuality must cause the
motion of a potentially moving object. But the motion of the object in actuality also cannot
be caused by itself, this leads to infinite regression. But Aquinas argued that infinite
regression is impossible and there must be some unmoved object that is the cause for
everything else, this unmoved mover is God. The object in motion does not have to actually
be in physical motion but needs to have the potential to move into actuality. Aquinas gives
the example of a piece of wood, this piece of wood has the potential to be hot but needs
fire in order to cause it to go into the state of hot (actuality).
Criticisms of the first way:
1. Anthony Kenny has claimed that Aquinas first way of motion goes against Newtons
first law of motion.
2. Aquinas claim that something can be made X only by something that is X can be
proven false. For example with his example of the wood becoming hot using fire,
wood can become hot by two pieces of wood being rubbed together to cause fire.
The second Way: Causation
Everything has an efficient cause and this cause also has a cause of its existence. Nothing
can be the efficient cause of itself as causes are prior to effects and nothing can be prior to
itself. An infinite regress is impossible, as, if there were no first cause there would be no
contrary causes and therefore no effects in the world and this is contrary to our experience.
The series of caused causes implies an uncaused cause and this first uncaused cause is God.
We can use the example of Dominos here, we may see the last domino topple over and
follow these dominos right back to try and find the first domino, even if we cannot stretch
that far back does not mean we assume there was not a first domino.
Criticisms of the second way:
1. God may be dead, perhaps there was once an unmoved mover but whos to say that
entity still exists. Aquinas assumes Gods continued existence but not argued for it.
The third way: Contingency
Aquinas argues that things are contingent, a contignet being is one that relies on something
else to exist, just as plants rely on water and sunlight to grow. If everuything is contingent
