A logical argument for the existence of a creator?

What are the main arguments for the existence of God?

The argument claims that the universe is strongly analogous, in its order and regularity, to an artifact such as a watch; because the existence of the watch justifies the presumption of a watchmaker, the existence of the universe justifies the presumption of a divine creator of the universe, or God.

What are the three main arguments for the existence of God philosophy?

Much of the discussion has focused on Kant’s “big three” arguments: ontological arguments, cosmological arguments, and teleological arguments.

What is the philosophical argument for the existence of God?

While the three argument types above, ontological, cosmological, and teleological, are regarded as the main classical types of arguments for the existence of God, some philosophers have used moral grounds to argue that God must exist.

What is the cosmological argument for the existence of God?

A cosmological argument, in natural theology, is an argument which claims that the existence of God can be inferred from facts concerning causation, explanation, change, motion, contingency, dependency, or finitude with respect to the universe or some totality of objects.

What are the three main arguments for the existence of God quizlet?

three sorts of epistemic arguments for theism: ‘cosmological arguments’, ‘teleological arguments’ and ‘ontological arguments’.

Which of the following is an argument used to explain the existence of God quizlet?

Which of the following is an argument used to explain the existence of God? Indecision, not making a decision, is actually a decision in itself.

What is theistic argument?

The theist believes that every object in the natural world exists because God creates and conserves that object; every finite thing has the character of being dependent on God.

How does the first cause argument prove the existence of God?

Scientific discoveries, eg the Big Bang theory , can be seen to support the first cause argument. If God caused the ‘Big Bang’, then God is the ‘first cause’ that brought the cosmos (universe) into existence. It confirms to the theist that there is purpose to the cosmos and a place for God as its ‘creator’.

What are the 5 arguments for the existence of God quizlet?

Terms in this set (5)

Everything moves in the universe; something started the motion. The First Mover is God. Everything is caused by something else, but there must be an Ultimate or First Cause. This First Cause is God.

Why does Hume doubt we could ever have reason to believe in miracles?

Nevertheless, Hume tells us that no testimony can be adequate to establish the occurrence of a miracle. The problem that arises is not so much with the reliability of the witnesses as with the nature of what is being reported. A miracle is, according to Hume, a violation of natural law.

Why Hume doesn’t think we are rationally justified in believing in miracles that we haven’t personally witnessed?

Since the laws of nature are far more probable than the testimony of witnesses, Hume suggests that we are never rationally justified in believing in miracles.

Does Hume believe in God?

I offer a reading of Hume’s writings on religion which preserves the many criticisms of established religion that he voiced, but also reveals that Hume believed in a genuine theism and a true religion. At the heart of this belief system is Hume’s affirmation that there is a god, although not a morally good.

What does Hume argue about miracles?

Hume defines a miracle as an event that (a) is caused by God (directly, or indirectly through an ‘invisible agent’) and (b) ‘violates’ (or ‘transgresses’) a law of nature (76, 77).

What is Hume’s theory?

According to Hume’s theory of the mind, the passions (what we today would call emotions, feelings, and desires) are impressions rather than ideas (original, vivid and lively perceptions that are not copied from other perceptions).

Does Hume say that miracles are impossible?

David Hume, in Of Miracles (Section X. of An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding), claimed either that, because a miracle would be a ‘violation of the laws of nature’, miracles are impossible or that one cannot have a justified belief that a miracle occurred.

What does Rene Descartes mean by radical doubt?

Descartes’ method of radical doubt focuses upon finding the truth about certain things from a philosophical perspective in order to truly lay down a foundation for ideas that have the slightest notion of doubt attached to them.

What are Descartes three arguments for doubt?

Descartes uses three very similar arguments to open all our knowledge to doubt: The dream argument, the deceiving God argument, and the evil demon argument.

Does Descartes doubt the existence of God?

According to Descartes, God’s existence is established by the fact that Descartes has a clear and distinct idea of God; but the truth of Descartes’s clear and distinct ideas are guaranteed by the fact that God exists and is not a deceiver. Thus, in order to show that God exists, Descartes must assume that God exists.

What is Descartes most famous expression?

Descartes was the author of several books during the Dutch golden age, namely – ‘Discourse On The Method’, ‘Principles Of Philosophy’ and ‘Treatise Of Man’. He is also the author of, and is known for his most famous catchphrase, “Cogito, ergo sum” which means “I think, therefore I am”.

What was Descartes idea?

Scholars agree that Descartes recognizes at least three innate ideas: the idea of God, the idea of (finite) mind, and the idea of (indefinite) body. In the letter to Elisabeth, he includes a fourth: the idea of the union (of mind and body). There is an alternate division of ideas worth noting.

What did Descartes believe in?

Descartes was also a rationalist and believed in the power of innate ideas. Descartes argued the theory of innate knowledge and that all humans were born with knowledge through the higher power of God. It was this theory of innate knowledge that was later combated by philosopher John Locke (1632–1704), an empiricist.