This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories
Subcategories:History/traditions: Cosmological Arguments for Theism
357 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Order:
1 — 50 / 357
Material to categorize
  1. B. A. (1998). Philip E. Devine. Human Diversity and the Culture Wars: Philosophical Perspectives on Contemporary Cultural Conflict. (Wesport, Connecticut: Praeger.) Pp. 192. £43.95. [REVIEW] Religious Studies 34 (2):231-234.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2. N. W. A. (1982). Dzieje Filozofii Europejskiej XV Wieku, Vol. IV. Review of Metaphysics 36 (1):204-206.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3. Robert Merrihew Adams & William L. Rowe (1978). The Cosmological Argument. Philosophical Review 87 (3):445.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4. Roy Ahmed-Jackson (1998). Speculations on the Cosmological Argument. The Philosophers' Magazine 3 (3):32-33.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5. David Alexander (2008). The Recent Revival of Cosmological Arguments. Philosophy Compass 3 (3):541–550.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6. George Allan (2008). Cosmological and Civilized Harmonies. In Michel Weber (ed.), Handbook of Whiteheadian Process Thought. De Gruyter. pp. 41-54.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7. Thomas Aquinas (2000). A Thirteenth Century Cosmological Argument. In Brian Davies (ed.), Philosophy of Religion: A Guide and Anthology. Oxford University Press.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8. Deane Baker, Howard College Campus.
    1. General. Explain briefly why the question, Do you believe in God? is ambiguous. (6) 2. The premodern period: (i) Set out as clearly as possible the cosmological argument for the existence of God. (ii) Explain why this does not entail infinite regress. (5) 3. The early modern period: Has the argument from the orderliness of nature (design) something new to add to the approach of the cosmological argument, by focussing on “natural” religion? Explain briefly. (5) 4. The later modern (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9. Peter A. Bertocci (1967). The Cosmological Argument—Revisited and Revised. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 41:149-159.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10. Lionel Blain (1967). The Cosmological Argument. World Futures 5 (4):82-83.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  11. Christopher Alan Bobier (2013). God, Time and the Kalām Cosmological Argument. Sophia 52 (4):593-600.
    The Kalām cosmological argument deploys the following causal principle: whatever begins to exist has a cause. Yet, under what conditions does something ‘begin to exist’? What does it mean to say that ‘X begins to exist at t’? William Lane Craig has offered and defended various accounts that seek to establish the necessary and sufficient conditions for when something ‘begins to exist.’ I argue that all of the accounts that William Lane Craig has offered fail on the following grounds: either (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12. Vernon J. Bourke (1980). The Kalam Cosmological Argument. By Wilham Lane Craig. Modern Schoolman 57 (4):371-371.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13. Raymond D. Bradley, Cosmological Arguments.
    Although most cogently formulated by philosophers such as St Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274), al Ghazali (1058-1111), and Gottfried Leibniz (1646- 1716), cosmological arguments have a powerful appeal also to those nonphilosophers who feel that the "ultimate" explanation for the existence of the natural universe is that it was created by some sort of supernatural entity, viz., God.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14. Anthony Brueckner (2001). Van Inwagen on the Cosmological Argument. Philosophical Papers 30 (1):31-40.
    Abstract In his book Metaphysics, Peter van Inwagen constructs a version of the Cosmological Argument which does not depend on the Principle of Sufficient Reason. He goes on to reject the argument. In this paper, I construct an alternative version of the Cosmological Argument that uses some of van Inwagen's insights and yet is immune to his criticisms. If we suppose that for each contingent truth, there is some at least partial explanation, then it follows that there is some necessary (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  15. Shafqat Bukhari, A Study of Ilm Ul Kalam with Special Reference to Sir Syed Ahmed Khan.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16. Stephen Bullivant (2009). God? A Debate Between a Christian and an Atheist. By William Lane Craig and Walter Sinnott-Armstrong. Heythrop Journal 50 (3):538-539.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17. Donald R. Burrill (1967). The Cosmological Arguments. Garden City, N.Y., Anchor Books.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  18. E. B. C. (1981). The Kaläm Cosmological Argument. Review of Metaphysics 35 (2):376-378.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19. James Cain (1995). The Hume-Edwards Principle. Religious Studies 31 (3):323 - 328.
    The Leibniz-Clarke version of the cosmological argument allows for the possibility that there might be a beginningless succession of objects, each produced by earlier objects in the succession, but it is held that a causal question would then arise as to what brought this whole succession of objects into being. This line of thought is commonly said to be confused and an appeal is made to a principle that if a causal explanation has been provided for each member of a (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20. Anselm of Canterbury (2000). A Concise Cosmological Argument From the Eleventh Century. In Brian Davies (ed.), Philosophy of Religion: A Guide and Anthology. Oxford University Press.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21. William E. Carroll (2012). Cosmology and Creation: From Hawking to Aquinas. Logos: A Journal of Catholic Thought and Culture 15 (1):134-149.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  22. Brian Coffey (1952). Notes on Cosmological Speculation. Modern Schoolman 29 (3):183-196.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23. Robin Collins, Objections to Smith's Cosmological Argument (2008).
    In his opening case , Quentin Smith has presented an ingenious argument for the claim that the universe is self caused, and hence its existence is self explanatory. He then goes on to claim that the fact that the universe is self caused, and hence self explanatory, is inconsistent with theism. His main argument is based on the assumption that each temporal part of the universe has an explanation in terms of the temporal parts existing prior to it. The fundamental (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  24. L. Hughes Cox (1974). Composition and the Cosmological Argument. New Scholasticism 48 (3):365-370.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25. L. W. Craig (2003). The Cosmological Argument. In Paul Copan & Paul K. Moser (eds.), Noûs. Routledge. pp. 114--115.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26. William L. Craig (1979). Wallace Matson and the Crude Cosmological Argument. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 57 (2):163 – 170.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27. William Lane Craig (2011). Graham Oppy on the Kalam Cosmological Argument. International Philosophical Quarterly 51 (3):303-330.
    Graham Oppy has emerged as one of the kalam cosmological argument’s most formidable opponents. He rejects all four of the arguments drawn from metaphysics and physics for the second premiss that the universe began to exist. He also thinks that we have no good reason to accept the first premiss that everything that begins to exist has a cause. In this response, I hope to show that the kalam cosmological argument is, in fact, considerably stronger than Oppy claims, surviving even (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  28. William Lane Craig (2010). Reflections On “Uncaused Beginnings”. Faith and Philosophy 27 (1):72-78.
    Graham Oppy’s interesting analysis of the “causal shape” of reality conflates causal ordering with temporal ordering of causes and assigns the wrong causal shape to reality as conceived by many classical theists. His argument for the possibility of uncaused beginnings is also hobbled by his tendency to ignore the crucial issue of the objective reality of tense and temporal becoming. Oppy’s claims that only certain types of things can come into being uncaused at a first moment of time and that (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29. William Lane Craig (2010). Taking Tense Seriously in Differentiating Past and Future. Faith and Philosophy 27 (4):451-456.
    Wes Morriston argues that even if we take an endless series of events to be merely potentially, rather than actually, infinite, still no distinction between a beginningless and an endless series of events has been established which is relevant to arguments against the metaphysical possibility of an actually infinite number of things: if a beginningless series is impossible, so is an endless series. The success of Morriston’s argument, however, comes to depend on rejecting the characterization of an endless series of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  30. William Lane Craig (2008). The Cosmological Argument. In Paul Copan & Chad V. Meister (eds.), Philosophy of Religion: Classic and Contemporary Issues. Blackwell.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31. William Lane Craig (2002). The Kalam Cosmological Argument. In Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie. Rutgers University Press. pp. 383-383.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   11 citations  
  32. William Lane Craig (1994). A Response to Grünbaum on Creation and Big Bang Cosmology. Philosophia Naturalis 31 (2):247.
  33. William Lane Craig (1993). Graham Oppy on the Kalām Cosmological Argument. Sophia 32 (1):1-11.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34. William Lane Craig (1992). God and the Initial Cosmological Singularity. Faith and Philosophy 9 (2):238-248.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  35. William Lane Craig (1984). Professor Mackie and the KalĀm Cosmological Argument. Religious Studies 20 (3):367.
    Like David Hume's Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion , J. L. Mackie's most potent blast against the rationality of belief in God, his The Miracle of Theism , appeared after his death. The book is a broadside against not only the traditional arguments for God's existence, such as the onto-, cosmo-, and teleological arguments, but also against proofs from consciousness, miracles, the idea of God, and so forth, and against the validity of religious experience and faith without reason, and it presents (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36. William Lane Craig (1982). The Kalām Cosmological Argument. Noûs 16 (2):328-334.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  37. William Lane Craig (1979). Dilley's Misunderstandings of the Cosmological Argument. New Scholasticism 53 (3):388-392.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  38. William Lane Craig (1978). A Further Critique of Reichenbach's Cosmological Argument. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 9 (1):53 - 60.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39. Houston Craighead (1975). The Cosmological Argument: Assessment of a Reassessment. [REVIEW] International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 6 (2):117 - 124.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  40. Dan D. Crawford (1980). The Cosmological Argument, Sufficient Reason, and Why-Questions. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 11 (2):111 - 122.
    To sum up the main results of this study: I have disentangled two distinct patterns of argument that Taylor runs together in his attempt to show that there is a reason or explanation for the world as a whole. The first is based on the causal dependency of things in the world, the second is based on their logical contingency. It seems to make the most sense of Taylor's discussion if we interpret him not as invoking the principle of sufficient (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  41. Kevin Davey & Rob Clifton (2001). Insufficient Reason in the ‘New Cosmological Argument’. Religious Studies 37 (4):485-490.
    In a recent article in this journal, Richard Gale and Alexander Pruss offer a new cosmological proof for the existence of God relying only on the Weak Principle of Sufficient Reason, W-PSR. We argue that their proof relies on applications of W-PSR that cannot be justified, and that our modal intuitions simply do not support W-PSR in the way Gale and Pruss take them to.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  42. Kevin Davey & Mark Lippelmann (2007). Closed Systems, Explanations, and the Cosmological Argument. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 62 (2):89 - 101.
    Examples involving infinite suspended chains or infinite trains are sometimes used to defend perceived weaknesses in traditional cosmological arguments. In this article, we distinguish two versions of the cosmological argument, suggest that such examples can only be relevant if it is one specific type of cosmological argument that is being considered, and then criticize the use of such examples in this particular type of cosmological argument. Our criticism revolves around a discussion of what it means to call a system closed, (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  43. Brian Davies O. P. (1983). The Cosmological Argument. New Blackfriars 64 (753):100-113.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44. Richard Davis, Bonaventure and the Kalam Argument.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  45. Stephen T. Davis (1992). Hierarchical Causes in the Cosmological Argument. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 31 (1):13 - 27.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  46. Timothy Joseph Day (1986). Infinite Regress Arguments: Some Metaphysical and Epistemological Problems. Dissertation, Indiana University
    In this dissertation we discuss infinite regress arguments from both a historical and a logical perspective. Throughout we deal with arguments drawn from various areas of philosophy. ;We first consider the regress generating portion of the argument. We find two main ways in which infinite regresses can be developed. The first generates a regress by defining a relation that holds between objects of some kind. An example of such a regress is the causal regress used in some versions of the (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  47. Martin J. de Nys (1978). The Cosmological Argument and Hegel's Doctrine of God. New Scholasticism 52 (3):343-372.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  48. Johan De Smedt & Helen De Cruz, The Cognitive Appeal of the Cosmological Argument.
    The cosmological argument has enjoyed and still enjoys substantial popularity in various traditions of natural theology. We propose that its enduring appeal is due at least in part to its concurrence with human cognitive predispositions, in particular intuitions about causality and agency. These intuitions seem to be a stable part of human cognition. We will consider implications for the justification of the cosmological argument from externalise and internalise perspectives.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  49. Jan Dejnozka (1989). Zeno's Paradoxes and the Cosmological Argument. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 25 (2):65 - 81.
    I SHOW THAT THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT OF AQUINAS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD COMMITS A RATHER TRIVIAL LINGUISTIC FALLACY, BY SHOWING THAT (1) SOME OF ZENO'S PARADOXES COMMIT A TRIVIAL LINGUISTIC FALLACY, AND THAT (2) THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT IS SUFFICIENTLY SIMILAR TO THESE PARADOXES THAT IT COMMITS THE SAME FALLACY. COPLESTON'S VIEW THAT "MENTION OF THE MATHEMATICAL INFINITE SERIES IS IRRELEVANT" TO "ANY" OF AQUINAS'S ARGUMENTS FOR GOD'S EXISTENCE IS THUS SHOWN FALSE.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  50. Josh Dever, Worlds Apart: On the Possibility of an Actual Infinity.
    Cosmological arguments attempt to prove the existence of God by appeal to the necessity of a first cause. Schematically, a cosmological argument will thus appear as: (1) All contingent beings have a cause of existence. (2) There can be no infinite causal chains. (3) Therefore, there must be some non-contingent First Cause. Cosmological arguments come in two species, depending on their justification of the second premiss. Non-temporal cosmological arguments, such as those of Aristotle and Aquinas, view causation as requiring explanatory (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
1 — 50 / 357