代写范文

留学资讯

写作技巧

论文代写专题

服务承诺

资金托管
原创保证
实力保障
24小时客服
使命必达

51Due提供Essay,Paper,Report,Assignment等学科作业的代写与辅导,同时涵盖Personal Statement,转学申请等留学文书代写。

51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标

私人订制你的未来职场 世界名企,高端行业岗位等 在新的起点上实现更高水平的发展

积累工作经验
多元化文化交流
专业实操技能
建立人际资源圈

Cosmologic Argument

2020-03-26 来源: 51Due教员组 类别: Report范文

宇宙学的论证依赖于一个前提和一个假设。前提是宇宙中的一切(包括宇宙本身)都有原因。假设这样一个原因或因果链的末端是上帝。有几种变体。第一种观点认为宇宙万物都存在于因果链中,因果链必须有一个终结。否则,宇宙就会陷入无限的因果回归,无法理解。因此,上帝是宇宙的终结,他自己没有理由。第二种观点认为宇宙本身有原因,就像宇宙中的每一个微观物体都有原因一样。这样的事业就是上帝。这个变体似乎是一个类比。从经验上讲,一切都有原因。然后,以此类推,宇宙是有原因的。然而,这一类比是否合理,仍然是有意义的。第三种说法认为宇宙中的一切都是偶然的,缺乏必要性。因此,它们必须由一个必要的存在来维持。否则,宇宙可能在一瞬间就不复存在了。因此,这样必要的存在就是上帝。

 

The cosmologic argument depends on one premise and one assumption. The premise is that everything in the universe (including the universe itself) has a cause. The assumption is that such a cause or the end of the chain of causation is God. There are several variants. The first one claims that everything in the universe lies in the chain of causation and the chain of causation must have an end. Otherwise, the universe lapses into infinite causal regress and unintelligible. Therefore, God is such an end of the universe and He himself has no cause. The second one claims that the universe itself has a cause in the way that every micro-object in the universe has a cause. Such a cause is God. This variant seems to be an analogy. Since empirical speaking, everything has a cause. Then, by analogy, the universe has a cause. However, it is still meaningful to ask whether this analogy is justifiable. The third variant claims that everything in the universe is contingent and in lack necessity. Therefore, they must be maintained by one necessary existence. Otherwise, the universe might cease to exist in one moment. Thus, such a necessary existence is God.

I don’t find this argument convincing. And it has not provided any satisfying explanation of the universe. Truly, this argument tries to explain the cause of the universe, which natural scientific explanation fails to do. However, this argument is not so much an explanation as an assumption. For instance, it assumes that the universe has a cause in the way that everything in the universe has a cause. However, it is possible that even though everything in the universe has a cause, but the universe itself might have no cause. In the minds of ancient oriental people, for instance, Daoism, the universe has no cause. In addition, the assumption that the universe has a cause does not mean God is such a cause. It is possible that the cause of the universe is something other than God but currently still unintelligible for human being. The Big Bang Theory, though controversial, has provided another explanation of the cause of the universe. What’s more, the premise that everything in the universe has a cause and lies in a linear chain of causation is also problematic. Hume’ doubt that it is impossible to build up a causal relationship between two events even if one of them proceeds another. The reason why people tend to build up a causal relation between two events lies in the fact that people have a psychological inclination to do so. However, this inclination has no rational foundation. If we accept Hume’s skepticism, the relationship between the universe and God, the “uncaused caused”, will be uprooted, not to mentioned the chain of causation. Therefore, the foundation of the existence of God falls. Secondly, even assuming there exist causal relations between events, the cause of one thing might be not linear, but a combination of many causes. For instance, when the sun rises, a plant blossoms. People tend to attribute flower simply to the sun. However, the sun is not the sole cause of flowers. Rather, it is the combination of the sun, water, soil and other reason that makes the flowers. Thus, the causal relationships between events are not linear, but much more complicated. As a result, it is not necessary to assume an end of the chain cause in order to make sense of how events begin and interact with each other. In this sense, the foundation of God is also ruined.

It is tempting to think that people’s psychological needs to explain the universe in the cosmologic argument’s way is one of the reasons why people accept such an argument. However, academically, people’s psychological needs can never be the reason to accept an argument or theory. Certainly, people are likely to assume something when science fails to provide answer to their puzzles, since those assumptions might make people more comfortable and more likely to behave morally. However, the usefulness or utility of an argument or assumption is not a good reason for people to accept them. Because, people’s psychological needs might change as time goes by. As a result, the usefulness of an argument will be lost in the future. If this is so, people would still have not any reason to accept the cosmologic argument in the future.

  51due为留学生提供最好的作业代写服务,亲们可以进入主页了解和获取更多代写范文提供作业代写服务,详情可以咨询我们的客服QQ800020041

上一篇:Plato’s myth of the cave 下一篇:Be Better Leaders