Philosophy · Year 13 · Metaphysics of God: Concept and Existence · 1.º Período

Cosmological Arguments

A study of arguments from causation and contingency, including Aquinas' First and Third Ways, and Descartes' cosmological argument. Students will assess objections regarding infinite regress.

TL;DR:Cosmological arguments seek to explain the existence of the universe by tracing it back to a 'First Cause' or a 'Necessary Being'. Students focus on Aquinas' First Way (Motion) and Third Way (Contingency), as well as Descartes' version. The topic delves into deep metaphysical questions about the nature of causation and the possibility of an infinite regress.

• National Curriculum Attainment Targets
• AQA A-Level Philosophy 7172: 3.2.1.2 Cosmological arguments
• DfE Philosophy AS and A-level subject content: Arguments for the existence of God

About This Topic

Cosmological arguments seek to explain the existence of the universe by tracing it back to a 'First Cause' or a 'Necessary Being'. Students focus on Aquinas' First Way (Motion) and Third Way (Contingency), as well as Descartes' version. The topic delves into deep metaphysical questions about the nature of causation and the possibility of an infinite regress.

This topic is a staple of the UK National Curriculum for Philosophy, requiring students to engage with the principle of sufficient reason. It challenges students to think about the universe as a whole rather than just the objects within it. Students grasp this concept faster through structured discussion and peer explanation, as the transition from 'everything has a cause' to 'the universe has a cause' is a logical step that requires careful scrutiny.

Key Questions

1. Is an infinite regress of causes logically impossible?
2. Does the universe require a necessary being to explain its existence?
3. Does the cosmological argument successfully prove the God of classical theism?

Watch Out for These Misconceptions

Common Misconception

The cosmological argument says 'everything has a cause'.

What to Teach Instead

Most versions actually say 'everything that begins to exist' or 'every contingent thing' has a cause. Using peer-checking of syllogisms helps students spot this vital distinction that allows God to be uncaused.

Common Misconception

Infinite regress is just a 'long time'.

What to Teach Instead

Infinite regress is a logical problem where an explanation is never completed. Using a 'chain of mirrors' analogy in small groups helps students see why an infinite series might fail to provide a foundation for existence.

Active Learning Ideas

Inquiry Circle

The Domino Effect

Using a physical or digital domino run, students model the concept of a 'First Cause'. They must then discuss what happens if the line of dominoes is infinite and whether a 'starting push' is logically required for the system to exist at all.

25 min·Small Groups

Think-Pair-Share

The Fallacy of Composition

Students are given examples like 'every human has a mother, so the human race must have a mother'. They discuss in pairs why this logic is flawed and then apply this 'fallacy of composition' to the cosmological argument's claim about the universe.

15 min·Pairs

Mock Trial

The Universe on Trial

Students act as 'prosecutors' arguing that the universe must have a cause (using Leibniz or Aquinas) and 'defenders' arguing the universe is just a 'brute fact' (using Russell). A jury of students decides which side has the more logical 'sufficient reason'.

45 min·Whole Class

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between a 'First Cause' and a 'Necessary Being'?

A 'First Cause' (Aquinas' Second Way) focuses on the chain of events and causation. A 'Necessary Being' (Aquinas' Third Way) focuses on the nature of existence, arguing that if everything could 'not exist', at one point nothing would have existed, which is impossible.

What was Bertrand Russell's objection to the argument?

Russell famously argued that the universe is just a 'brute fact'. He claimed that just because every object in the universe has a cause, it doesn't mean the universe itself needs one. He called this a 'fallacy of composition'.

How can active learning help students understand cosmological arguments?

Cosmological arguments involve complex chains of logic. Active learning strategies like the 'Domino Effect' or 'Mock Trial' allow students to visualize these chains and test the 'Principle of Sufficient Reason' in a social, argumentative context, making the abstract logic more concrete.

Does the Big Bang theory support the cosmological argument?

Some philosophers, like William Lane Craig, argue it does because it suggests the universe had a beginning. However, others argue the Big Bang is just a physical event that doesn't necessarily require a 'supernatural' cause.