David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Sophia 34 (2):15-29 (1995)
I hold that the considerations adduced in kalam cosmological arguments do not embody reasons for reflective atheists and agnostics to embrace the conclusion of those arguments, viz. that the universe had a cause of its existence. I do not claim to be able to show that reflective theists could not reasonably believe that those arguments are sound; indeed, I am prepared to concede that it is epistemically possible that the arguments procede validly from true premises. However, I am prepared to make the same concession about the following argument: Either 2+2=5 or God exists; 2+2?5; therefore God exists . But nobody could think that this argument deserves to be called a proof of its conclusion (even if it is sound). Of course, this latter argument is obviously circular: (almost) no one who was not antecedently persuaded of the truth of the conclusion would (have reason to) believe the first premise. But this fact does not entail that admittedly non circular arguments, such as the kalam cosmological arguments, cannot fail to be equally dialectically ineffective. And, indeed, that is the view which I wish to defend: there is not the slightest reason to think that kalam cosmological arguments should be dialectically effective against reasonable and reflective opponents.
|Keywords||God Craig theism argument for God Kalam cosmological argument|
|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
John J. Park (forthcoming). The Kalām Cosmological Argument, the Big Bang, and Atheism. Acta Analytica:1-13.
Similar books and articles
Gustavo E. Romero & Daniela Pérez (2012). New Remarks on the Cosmological Argument. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 72 (2):103-113.
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.
William Lane Craig (1999). A Swift and Simple Refutation of the Kalam Cosmological Argument? Religious Studies 35 (1):57-72.
William Lane Craig (2006). J. Howard Sobel on the Kalam Cosmological Argument. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 36 (4):565-84.
Graham Oppy (1995). Professor William Craig's Criticisms of Critiques of Kalam Cosmological Arguments By Paul Davies, Stephen Hawking, and Adolf Grunbaum. Faith and Philosophy 12 (2):237-250.
Graham Oppy (2002). Arguing About The Kalam Cosmological Argument. Philo 5 (1):34-61.
Graham Oppy (2001). Time, Successive Addition, and Kalam Cosmological Arguments. Philosophia Christi 3 (1):181-192.
Added to index2009-12-20
Total downloads195 ( #16,557 of 1,906,955 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #468,378 of 1,906,955 )
How can I increase my downloads?