Abstract

"Cosmological argument" is the name of a series of arguments, in which emphasizing on the imperfect existents' need to a perfect one and the impossibility of infinite regression, the existence of that perfect existent is proved. Some versions of this argument are as follows: the argument of motion, the argument of causality, and the argument of contingency and necessity; through all of which the existence of Unmoved Mover, Uncaused Cause, and the Necessary Being is proved relying on the imperfection of moving, caused, and contingent thing.There were opponents and exponents for the Cosmological argument in the Western philosophy. What is discussed in the present article is the views of some of the most eminent exponents of this argument as well as the critiques made against them. The article begins with Plato's view, and then views of Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, Descartes, John Locke, and Leibniz are quoted.The present article is mostly aimed to introduce the various versions of this argument in the Western philosophy. At the same time, the author has tried, on the one hand, to answer some critiques made against these versions, and on the other, to criticize some defects, which are seen in these versions.