Understanding the Kalam Cosmological Argument

Nov 13, 2024

Lecture Notes: The Kalam Cosmological Argument

Overview

  • Focus on the Kalam Cosmological Argument by William Lane Craig.
  • Originates from the Kalam School of Philosophy, similar to medieval arguments.
  • Aimed at challenging atheist naturalism by establishing a cause for the universe.

Requirements for Cosmological Argument

  1. Validity: Argument must be logically valid.
  2. Use of Weak Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR): Avoids strong PSR which involves regresses.
  3. Conclusion Incompatible with Atheist Naturalism: Must challenge the naturalist worldview.

Kalam Cosmological Argument

  • Premise 1: Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
  • Premise 2: The universe began to exist.
  • Conclusion: Therefore, the universe has a cause.

Analysis

  • Validity: Analogous to the logical structure of "All men are mortal, Socrates is a man, therefore Socrates is mortal."
  • Weak PSR: Used in Premise 1; avoids discussion of regresses.
  • Incompatibility with Atheist Naturalism:
    • A cause must be distinct from its effect.
    • Atheist naturalists assert only the universe exists.
    • A cause suggests existence outside the universe, conflicting with atheism.

Defense of the Argument

  • Craig focuses on defending Premise 2.
  • Support for Premise 2:
    • Philosophical Arguments: Notably unsuccessful.
    • Scientific Confirmations:
      • Laws of Thermodynamics: Energy equalization implies a beginning.
      • Big Bang Cosmogeny: Critical for supporting Premise 2.
        • Universe began 13.8 billion years ago from a singularity.
        • Big Bang supports the universe having a finite past.

Importance of Big Bang

  • Big Bang confirmed by background radiation.
  • Suggests the universe had a beginning.
  • Craig suggests God caused the Big Bang.

Evaluation of Cosmological Arguments

  • Cosmological Push: Term coined to describe the indeterminate outcome of the argument.
    • Interpretations:
      • Big Bang caused by God vs. Big Bang uncaused.
      • No consensus on whether Big Bang was the universe's beginning.
    • Alternative Models:
      • Oscillation model: Big Bang followed by Big Crunch.
      • Multiverse theories.
      • Singularity as potentially eternal.

Scientific Consensus

  • Big Bang is a scientific consensus.
  • Disagreement on whether it marks the absolute beginning of the universe.
  • Modified Premise 2: "The Big Bang was the beginning of the universe as we know it."
    • Changes the conclusion to align with atheist naturalism.

Conclusion

  • Cosmological Push: Intuition-based decision on interpretation of the Big Bang.
    • Uncaused Big Bang vs. uncaused God.
    • Both interpretations involve one uncaused entity.
    • Each interpretation is equally "weird" to different perspectives.
  • Purpose of Cosmological Arguments:
    • Not necessarily to prove a higher power.
    • Useful for understanding points of disagreement and refining intuitions.

Next Steps

  • Upcoming topics include design arguments and the problem of evil.
  • Note: Fine-tuning arguments will not be covered this semester.
  • Next lecture will cover analogical reasoning leading into Paley’s arguments.