Kalam cosmological argument

Encyclopedia : K : KA : KAL : Kalam cosmological argument

The Kalām cosmological argument is a version of the cosmological argument derived from the Islamic Kalam form of dialectical argument. It attempts to prove the existence of God by appealing to the principle of universal cause. Similar arguments are found in the theologies of Judaism (for example, in the work of Maimonides) and Christianity (for example in Thomas Aquinas), where it is known as the "uncaused cause" or "first cause" argument.

A recent formulation of the argument by William Lane Craig is as follows:

Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
The universe began to exist.
Therefore, the universe must have a cause.

The first premise is fairly straightforward. Craig defines "begins to exist" as "comes into being," and the idea is that things don't just pop into being uncaused.

The second premise is usually supported by the following argument:

An actual infinite cannot exist.
A beginningless series of events is an actual infinite
Therefore, the universe cannot have existed infinitely in the past, as that would be a beginingless series of events.

The definition of an actual infinite comes from set theory. The Big Bang Theory is normally regarded as adhering to a finite universe. The possibily of an actual infinite is often disputed, and is the focal point of this argument.

Craig describes the impossibility of an actual infinite like an endless bookcase. For example, imagine a bookcase that extends infinitely on which there is an infinite number of books, colored green and red, green and red, and so on. Obviously there would is an infinite number of books. But imagine you remove all red colored books. How many are left? An infinite amount. Thus infinity divided by two equals infinity, which is illogical. Infinity is in imaginative construct, and cannot be applied to "actual" things (hence the term actual infinite). One can imagine taking a finger and passing an infinite number of dimensionless points on a ruler from one end to the other, but time is not dimensionless or imaginary. According to Craig, there cannot be an infinite number of past events, because one cannot traverse an infinite set of events.

In summary, the Kalam Cosmological Argument rests on the premise that the universe is not infinite in the past, but had a finite beginning which necessitates an immaterial cause for its existence.

Objections

One challenge to the argument would be to question whether finite objects can self-cause. Quentin Smith, world renowned atheist scholar, states that "the universe...both caused itself to exist and caused the later states of the universe to exist."[link] He says that the whole universe does not need an extra cause; if all parts of the universe cause each other to exist, that logically implies that the whole exists. Smith claims that "the first state of the universe consists of an indefinitely or infinitely long chain of simultaneous events that are causally connected to each other." This view relies on two controversial concepts: that of a physically existing actual infinite; and that of a cause simultaneous with its effect.

Another objection concerns whether or not the kalam argument's conclusion, "the universe must have a cause," points to the existence of God. That is, why must the cause of the universe, if there is one, be God? This objection does not question the validity of the syllogism itself, but of its application to theism. Craig responds that "the simple syllogism lying at the heart of the kalam cosmological argument should be supplemented by a conceptual analysis of what it is to be a cause of the universe, an exercise which serves to recover many of the traditional divine attributes." [link]

Kalam cosmological argument

Objections

Further reading

See also