The cosmological argument is basically an argument about causation.

The Cosmological Argument takes several forms but is basically represented below.

The argument is in three forms; motion, causation and being.

The cosmological argument is however not a valid argument in explaining the existence of god because the conclusions do not logically follow the premises.

The cosmological argument begins with a general claim about the physical universe e.g.

The Kalam Cosmological Argument

If, on the one hand, God is thought to have a cause of his existence, then positing the existence of God in order to explain the existence of the universe doesn‘t get us anywhere. Without God there is one entity the existence of which we cannot explain, namely the universe; with God there is one entity the existence of which we cannot explain, namely God. Positing the existence of God, then, raises as many problems as it solves, and so the cosmological argument leaves us in no better position than it found us, with one entity the existence of which we cannot explain.

The Kalam Cosmological Argument provides nothing to substantiate the claim that there is a creator.

The vast majority of these possible universes would not have allowed for the existence of life, so we are very fortunate indeed to have a universe that does. On an atheistic world-view, there is no way to explain this good fortune; the atheist must put this down to chance. On the view that God exists, though, we can explain why the universe is the way that it is; it is because God created the universe with beings like us in mind. This argument, if it is successful, strongly suggests the existence of a Creator that takes an interest in humanity.

Arguments for and against the existence of a Creator abound, but two of these stand above the rest.


Cosmological Argument For The Existence Of God

McCloskey delves into both the Cosmological and Teleological arguments, which within he criticizes the arguments and to further his argument against theism, he also presents the Problem of Evil and why evil cannot possibly exist with a perfect God being the creator of universe....

Aquinas cosmological argument for the existence of God ..

I argue that (1) there are significant differences between Peirce's neglected argument and the traditional arguments for God's existence; (2) Peirce's analysis of the neglected argument into three arguments is misleading; (3) there are two distinct levels of argument that Peirce does not recognize; and (4) it is doubtful whether the argument meets all...

Outline the Cosmological Argument for the existence …

Peirce sketches "a nest of three arguments for the Reality of God" in his article "A Neglected Argument for the Reality of God." I provide careful analysis and explication of Peirce's argument, along with consideration of some objections.

The Cosmological Argument is mainly ..

The equation of the rational with the real is at the heart of the argument I here consider, that being the ontological argument for the existence of God.

Explain Aquinas cosmological argument for the existence …

He infuses numerous theological doctrines, mainly from Saint Augustine, alongside Aristotelian ideals such as, the first mover, to corroborate his argument for the existence of God....

The Kalam Cosmological Argument Essay - 474 Words

These arguments are either a priori, understood independent of worldly experience and observation (Ontological Argument), or a posteriori, dependent on experience and based on observations of how the world is (Cosmological and Teleological Arguments).