David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In the last twenty years analytic philosophy has seen a rising interest in the philosophy of religion in general and in rational reconstructions of religion related arguments and Christian doctrines. In this short note I like to point to a problem that although cosmological arguments play a great role in the present discussion has not received the attention, I believe, it deserves. An old objection to cosmological arguments, named “the Carriage Objection” by Schopenhauer, charges them as being arbitrary: the arguments are employed to carry you to the existence of God, but no further (as the carriage carries you to some destination to be dismissed then, therefore the name of the objection). A simple cosmological argument claims the existence of the universe to require explanation, and offers God as the cause of the universe. The Carriage Objection now asks why the principle of sufficient explanation that carried the argument forth to God will not carry us on to a sufficient explanation of God, and then on – ad infinitum . The regress is considered to be vicious. If one was to accept some brute fact (like the existence of God) then why not stop with the brute fact of the existence of the universe?
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
William F. Vallicella (1997). The Hume-Edwards Objection to the Cosmological Argument. Journal of Philosophical Research 22:423-443.
Seyed Hassan Hosseini (2011). A Comparative Study on the Degree of Dependence of Clarke's and Sadra's Arguments for the Existence of God on the Principle of Sufficient Reason. Hekmat Va Falsafeh 6 (24):53 - 68.
R. G. Swinburne (1984). Arguments for the Existence of God. In J. Houston (ed.), Is It Reasonable to Believe in God? Handsel Press. 121 - 133.
Richard Cross (2006). The Eternity of the World and the Distinction Between Creation and Conservation. Religious Studies 42 (4):403-416.
R. G. Swinburne (1989). Arguments for the Existence of God IN Key Themes in Philosophy. In . Cambridge Univ Pr.
W. Matthews Grant (2007). Must a Cause Be Really Related to its Effect? The Analogy Between Divine and Libertarian Agent Causality. Religious Studies 43 (1):1-23.
Neil A. Manson (2009). The Fine-Tuning Argument. Philosophy Compass 4 (1):271-286.
Yujin Nagasawa (2010). The Ontological Argument and the Devil. Philosophical Quarterly 60 (238):72-91.
Ismail Latif Hacinebioglu (2008). Does God Exist? Logical Foundations of the Cosmological Argument. Insan Publ.
J. P. Moreland (2003). A Response to a Platonistic and to a Set-Theoretic Objection to the Kalam Cosmological Argument. Religious Studies 39 (4):373-390.
Thomas Metcalf (2005). Entailment and Ontological Arguments. Philo 8 (2):131-133.
Brian Kierland & Philip Swenson (2013). Ability-Based Objections to No-Best-World Arguments. Philosophical Studies 164 (3):669-683.
Added to index2012-09-05
Total downloads8 ( #165,166 of 1,096,714 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #271,187 of 1,096,714 )
How can I increase my downloads?