Research Paper on Existence of God: Main Arguments

Objections to the First Cause Argument

The modern physical theories contradict Aristotle's and Aquinas explanation that external force sustains motion. Instead, they demonstrate that acceleration requires force rather than simply change in position. Newtonian Laws demonstrate that objects can remain at rest or within their uniform motion. Secondly, the existence of external nature that causes motion and first event barely guarantees God's existence. Thirdly, the argument that first members are a product of some event triggered outside of the natural world commits to the birthday fallacy. Additionally, the world has infinite past if its future is possible thereby contradicting the claim that causal chains lack extension into the past. Lastly, every event must not have a cause since explanations provided only align with events observed.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Necessary or Contingent Object

Contingent object relies upon on other happening and something to exist. A necessary object exists regardless of the situation, and neither depends on anything to be existent. A possible world is when existing objects were absent and the non-existent available. It implies that a contingent object would still exist but fail to exhaust all possible worlds. To the contrary, the necessary object would appear in all possible worlds.

Reductio Argument

Reductio argument occurs when one uses one proposition to show its contradicting version is true. From Aquinas argument, the sole existence of contingent beings would leave the present world empty. It disproves a statement to support an inevitably impractical conclusion. Given that the world is not empty supports the argument that not all objects are necessary. An illustration that sports activities expose participants to unhealthy injuries. The reductio ad absurdum logic would hold that physically inactive individuals have the best health.

First Cause and Necessary Existing

The attempts by Aquinas using reduction argument to prove that not all objects are contingent appears to show at least existence of one necessary being. However, God's existence neither follows the first cause nor from the existence of necessary being. Contingency and necessity are propositions properties. It implies that necessary propositions are true if such occurs in all possible worlds, unlike contingences that appear true and false. Such arises when estimating the height of natural features or giving the territorial location of a country. Necessarily object exists without being God in contextual truths. Such arises when considering the plausible view involving mathematical propositions and arithmetic facts.

Design Argument as an Abductive Argument

It arises where the design argument using complexity and adaptedness of living things reveals the existence of God in observable things. However, the conclusion that existence of things indirectly observed cripples the limit that scientists have not observed. The argument fails to yield a deductive validity and instead appears analogous in the second inference to offer the best explanation. The design argument supports the inference that there exists the supreme intelligent being, hence abductive to offer the best explanation of intricate and adaptedness observed in organisms.

Surprise Principle Usage in Paley's Argument about the Watch

From design hypothesis, it would not be surprising in the existence of an intelligent watchmaker whose input produced the complex machine that suited measuring temporal intervals. The argument uses the surprise principle by suggesting that the watch arose from the process where waves pounded on the sand. It surprises if the source of the watch is the chimp given its intelligence. Instead, the watchmaker must have possessed intelligence that aligns with the human order to make the watch.

Hume Criticisms of Design Argument

Hume criticisms of design argument represent them as either inductive or derived from analogy. He asserted that organisms are different from watches to shows that weakness and strength in analogy depend on the similarity emerging between analog and target. He says the similarity cited in global design argument fails to accommodate the relevance of other features. Secondly, Hume assumes that design argument should demonstrate an inductive nature to make sense. However, inductive arguments feature observation of samples and extrapolating other claims for objects not sampled. Hume explanation suggests that strong inductive inferences would arise if we increase the sample size.

Hume criticism of the design argument that sample size justifies the conclusion individuals make is irrelevant. His criticism only considered design argument being inductive and deductive, thereby overlooked abduction possibility. The small sample size cannot make inferences made irrelevant when abductive. Hume criticism of Paley argument as irrelevant since the strength and weaknesses of analogy argument arises from the similarity in the target and analog is mistaken. The use of surprise principle disregards the similarity cited to term design argument a weak argument from the analogy.