Episode 2: Objections to the Cosmological Argument

In this episode, I review some major objections against the traditional cosmological argument (particularly those raised by Objectivist philosopher, Dr. Diana Hsieh), and respond to each. You can view an outline of those objections below. You can also listen directly to Dr. Hsieh present these arguments in her series here.

<< Episode 1

If you find value in this work, please consider 'trading value for value'

The major objections (in the order in which I address them) are as follows:

1) The quest for a cause or beginning to the Universe is misled, because "Existence exists".

2) The Cosmological Argument commits the Fallacy of Composition.

3) What caused God? And if we must posit an uncaused thing, why not just the Universe?

4) Finally, even if we do admit an uncaused thing which isn't the Universe, why God?

Some additional objections:

1) The Theist misuses infinity.

2) The Theist is begging the question with a numerical ordering of causation.

3) Matter is eternal, therefore we don't need God.

4) The Necessary Cause argument rests on a faulty assumption about "necessary" and "contingent" truths.

If you'd like my notes on my replies to these objections, please feel free to message via Facebook and ask for them!

 

One thought on “Episode 2: Objections to the Cosmological Argument

  1. Pingback:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *