IV.

Arguments for Theism

Despite Kierkegaard’s skepticism about the value of reason in supporting belief in God, many philosophers have attempted to demonstrate the existence of God by rational argument.

A.

The Ontological Argument

One of the most important attempts to demonstrate the existence of God is the ontological argument of Saint Anselm, an 11th-century theologian. Anselm’s argument maintains that God, defined as the greatest being that can be conceived, must exist, since a being that does not exist would by virtue of that fact lack an attribute that contributes to its greatness. Critics have questioned, however, whether existence actually contributes to a being’s greatness.

B.

The Cosmological Argument

Another important attempt to provide a rational justification for the existence of God is the cosmological argument, also called the argument from first cause. This justification was expounded by Aquinas and 18th-century English philosopher Samuel Clarke, among others. One important version of this argument contends that to explain the existence of the contingent universe it is essential to postulate a necessary being, a being whose existence is not contingent on anything else. This necessary being is God. Critics have argued that the existence of the universe might be a brute fact—a fact without any explanation. They assert that proving the existence of a necessary being is not the same as proving the existence of God. A necessary being might lack some of the properties considered essential to God, such as being all good. In a version of the cosmological argument found in contemporary scientific cosmology, God is postulated as the explanation for the big bang, the theory that a gigantic explosion created the material universe. Although contemporary theists, such as American philosopher William Lane Craig, maintain that a first cause is necessary to explain the big bang, critics contend that recent scientific theories indicate that the universe could have arisen spontaneously.

C.

The Teleological Argument

According to the teleological argument for the existence of God—also known as the argument from design—the universe is analogous to a machine. The best known exponent of this view is 18th-century theologian William Paley. According to this theory, because machines are created by intelligent beings, and because the universe may be thought of as a single, highly complex machine, it is likely that the universe was created by a great intelligence, understood to be God. The classic critique of this argument, presented by 18th-century Scottish philosopher David Hume, maintains that the analogy to a machine is weak and that other analogies are just as strong. For instance, the universe may be thought of as a living organism, in which case the universe would have been created by reproduction rather than by design.

D.

The Moral Argument

The moral argument for the existence of God was developed by 18th-century German philosopher Immanuel Kant. Kant maintained that the highest good includes moral virtue, with happiness as the appropriate reward for this virtue. He held it is humanity’s duty to seek this highest good and that it must therefore be possible to realize it. Furthermore, Kant claimed that this highest good cannot be realized unless there is “a supreme cause of nature,” one that has the power to bring about harmony between happiness and virtue. Such a cause could only be God. Critics of the moral argument counter that it is by no means clear that the highest good is what Kant supposed.

E.

Pascal’s Wager

Another well known argument for the existence of God purports to show that even if God’s existence cannot be known through reason, it is still practically advantageous to believe in God. Thus, 17th-century French philosopher Blaise Pascal held that belief in God is a better wager than nonbelief because there are infinite rewards to gain and little to lose by believing versus infinite rewards to lose and little to gain by not believing. Critics have argued that God might reserve a special place in Hell for people who believe in him on the basis of Pascal’s wager.