The Instigator
LuckyPenny
Pro (for)
The Contender
MagicAintReal
Con (against)

Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of God Fail

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
LuckyPenny has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/14/2018 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 591 times Debate No: 112785
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

LuckyPenny

Pro

I tried to make the topic statement as self-explanatory as possible. I find cosmological arguments to be incredibly interesting as they are popular (due to the sizable reach of Natural Theology among lay believers) and can involve complex philosophical issues about things like causes, contingency/necessity, time, modality (especially metaphysical and logical possibility), and so on. As an atheist, I believe that all cosmological arguments fail for some reason or another (either they are structurally problematic, the premises are false, or there is no warrant for the premises) and would love to discuss these issues with someone else.

I would like for round 1 to be primarily for acceptance, as I am not posting any objections/arguments, and round 2 can be the official beginning of the debate. If one uses sources then they should be cited for ease of reference for myself and others. I'm excited to have this debate!

I just wanted to round this off with a few definitions on my end.

[1] Cosmological Argument (CA) - CAs are arguments for the existence of God based on an inference from some, usually empirical, phenomena to the existence of an agent.

[2] Contingency Cosmological Arguments (CCA) - CCAs make an inference from the existence of contingent (things that could logically fail to exist) things to a necessary (things that can not logically fail to exist) thing agent. This involves a principle of sufficient reason (PSR) that requires at least some contingent facts be explained in virtue of something else.

[3] Kalam Cosmological Arguments (KCA) - KCAs use the beginning of the universe as the motivation for accepting the existence of a causal agent. It operates on the inductive inference that because a set x has members that begin to exist via causal relations then the universe also begins to exist in a similar way.

[4] Thomist Cosmological Arguments (TCA) - TCAs, taking a page from Aquinas, use Aristotelian metaphysical notions (potency, actuality) to back up the argument for a prime mover.

I'm sure there are other arguments in this vein and I'm not tying you to any particular one.
MagicAintReal

Con

Thanks for the debate Pro.
I accept.
Pro provided definitions for Cosmological Arguments (CAs).
However, Pro did not provide definitions for the other terms of the resolution.

Definitions

existence - the fact of having objective reality.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...

god - a superhuman existence worshiped for having power over nature or human fortunes.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...

fail - be unsuccessful.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...


*Request*

I request the voters use OPT-IN voting standards when voting, so no crappy votes get past moderation.
Please no crappy votes.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by MagicAintReal 3 years ago
MagicAintReal
Why did you forfeit???
Posted by canis 3 years ago
canis
"Cosmological Arguments" are not arguments. it ends up with an "uncreated creator"..It could be anything. "proton like things" resulting in chemical evolutioin and ending up with biological evo. Only our imagination is the limet..So it becomes the "uncreated creator created by us"
Posted by LuckyPenny 3 years ago
LuckyPenny
Just so I don"t waste space in my round 2, thank you for those additional definitions. I don"t have any particular issues with them and, in all honesty, should have included them myself. Anyways, I look forward to this debate with you!
This debate has 6 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.