Causality, necessity and the cosmological argument

Philosophical Studies 36 (3):261 - 270 (1979)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I distinguish between a causeless being, An essentially causeless being, And a logically necessary being, And argue that only a logically necessary being can provide an adequate answer to the question, "why do contingent and dependent beings exist?" I also argue that recent attempts to show that if a being is essentially causeless, It is logically necessary, Are unsound

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Causal Necessity and the Ontological Argument.James M. Humber - 1974 - Religious Studies 10 (3):291 - 300.
Could God Be a Necessary Being?Richard Swinburne - 2015 - In Jonathan Kvanvig, Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion. Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press. pp. 224-244.
Bertrand Russell's Defence of the Cosmological Argument.Mark T. Nelson - 1998 - American Philosophical Quarterly 35 (1):87-100.
The cosmological argument and the causal principle.Bruce R. Reichenbach - 1975 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 6 (3):185 - 190.
From Possible Causes II.Alexander R. Pruss & Joshua L. Rasmussen - 2018 - In Alexander R. Pruss & Joshua L. Rasmussen, Necessary Existence. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. pp. 93-109.
A Necessary Being.Richard Swinburne - 1993 - In The Coherence of Theism. Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press UK. pp. 263-290.
Stephen Davis’s objection to the second ontological argument.Bashar Alhoch - 2016 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 80 (1):3-9.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
137 (#321,370)

6 months
9 (#1,211,565)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references