Cosmological Argument for the Existence of God
The simplest definition of the cosmological argument for the existence of God is that the cosmological argument is "the argument that the existence of the world or universe is strong evidence for the existence of a God who created it." The difference between the Ontological Argument and the Cosmological Argument is that the latter proceeds a posteriori, starting from a very simple, causal affirmation.
The Cosmological Argument is made up of a reasonably simple syllogism. According to this syllogism, everything that exists has a cause of existence. The universe exists, hence, the universe has a cause of its existence. If that is true, then that cause is God. Hence, God exists.
However, there may arise the question on whether God himself has a cause of his existence. If he did, then the cosmological argument is not enough to prove that God exists, because we would have to explain the existence of the entity thus believed to have a cause, namely, God.
If we believe that God has no cause of his existence, then we are in denial of the part of the syllogism, according to which "everything that exists has a cause of its existence." If the premise on which we-based our syllogism is a priori false, then the entire judgment is so.
There are two forms of the cosmological argument. The first is the kalam cosmological argument, through which a distinction is drawn between the universe and God in that "the universe has a beginning in time," while God does not. Thus, the problem with the false premise is avoided. The second is the argument from contingency which claims that the Universe could have not existed. Everything that exists contingently has a cause of existence.
Bibliography
1. The Cosmological Argument. On the Internet at http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/cosmological.html
The Cosmological Argument. On the Internet at http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/cosmological.html
