Emanuel Rutten A CritiCAl Assessment of ContemporAry CosmologiCAl Arguments Towards a Renewed Case for Theism A Critical Assessment of Contemporary Cosmological Arguments Towards a Renewed Case for Theism Vrije UniVersiteit A Critical Assessment of Contemporary Cosmological Arguments Towards a Renewed Case for Theism AcAdemisch proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad Doctor aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, op gezag van de rector magnificus prof. dr. L.M. Bouter, in het openbaar te verdedigen ten overstaan van de promotiecommissie van de Faculteit der Wijsbegeerte op donderdag 20 september 2012 om 11.45 uur in de aula van de universiteit, De Boelelaan 1105 door Gerardus Johannes Emanuel Rutten geboren te Loosdrecht • Amsterdam 2012 Promotoren prof. dr. R. van Woudenberg, prof. dr. T. O’Connor Copromotor dr. ir. G.J. de Ridder Copyright © 2012 by Emanuel Rutten All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without prior permission in writing of the author. Designed by Hans Stol Printed in The Netherlands by Wöhrmann Print Service isbn 978-90-819608-0-9 nUr 733 Contents Acknowledgments 7 i Introduction 9 A resurgence of metaphysics 9 Structure of this thesis 9 Ontological framework 10 Methodology 12 An initial objection 13 ii Traditional cosmological arguments: two paradigmatic forms 17 Introduction 17 The first paradigmatic form 17 The second paradigmatic form 21 Closing remarks 27 iii The cosmological argument of Koons 29 Introduction 29 Background 30 The argument 32 Objections 34 Closing remarks 50 iV The cosmological argument of Gale and Pruss 51 Introduction 51 Background 51 The argument 54 Objections 60 Closing remarks 96 V Cosmological arguments of Rasmussen 97 Introduction 97 The argument from a maximal contingent state of existence 97 Three additional alternative paths to the existence of a concrete necessary being 117 Closing remarks 122 Vi Atomism, causalism and the existence of a first cause 123 Introduction 123 Stage setting 124 Parthood and composition 124 The argument 126 In defense of the premises 128 Closing remarks 135 Vii A critical assessment of the argument from causalism and atomism 137 Introduction 137 Objections discussed as part of the traditional Thomistic and Leibnizian arguments 137 Objections discussed as part of the arguments of Koons, Gale & Pruss, and Rasmussen 140 Objections specifically addressing the new argument’s framework or premises 150 Viii Conclusions and further work 163 Introduction 163 An inherent limitation of cosmological arguments 163 Two further, more fundamental, problems 165 The case for theism 171 Samenvatting 193 References 201 Acknowledgements First of all I would like to express my gratitude to René van Woudenberg and Jeroen de Ridder for their excellent guidance and support during my whole project. Their insightful comments on all the earlier versions of all the chapters of my dissertation have been very helpful and I appreciated our joint discussions deeply, not only about my dissertation, but also about metaphysics and philosophy in general. Also I am grateful to Tim O’Connor for his role as second promotor and for studying my dissertation. Further, I would like to thank Herman Philipse for his special interest in my research project. I much enjoyed our discussions on various chapters of my dissertation and on other philosophical topics that came on the table during those sessions. Furthermore I am thankful for the very positive and constructive comments on my dissertation from Robert Koons and Gijsbert van den Brink. In fact, one particular comment from Robert Koons has already given me inspiration for a new paper. Next, I would like to extend special thanks to Alexander Pruss who responded so enthusiastically on my new modal-epistemic argument for the existence of God, which resulted in its publication on Prosblogion, which, in turn, led to it being mentioned on the website of the New York Times. Thanks also to Fred Muller who was kind enough to write a concise and in-depth research note on my a priori argument for atomism, in which he rightly pointed out a number of specific mathematical complications. Moreover, I would like to thank the members of the Dutch Research Seminar for Analytic Philosophy for their constructive feedback on my argument for the existence of a first cause from atomism and causalism. Thanks also to anonymous readers from Philosophical Studies and Religious Studies for their helpful comments. And last but not least I am thankful for the pleasant and fruitful interactions I had about my project and other related topics with Jeroen Valk, Hans Kennepohl, Job Joris Andreoli, Marcel Zuijderland, Sjoerd van Hoorn, Jelle Van Baardewijk, Rik Peels and many others. i Introduction A resurgence of metaphysics 1 A first cause is an uncaused This thesis falls within the research area of theoretical (systematic) entity that is the direct or indirect philosophy. Its subject matter is metaphysics or ontology, or more cause of everything else besides itself. It follows that if there is a specifically, cosmological arguments for the existence of a first cause.1 first cause, then that first cause is As such this thesis belongs to the domain of natural theology, and is part unique. So, there can be at most of a broader program that deals with various issues having to do with one first cause. 2 In this thesis a first cause the intellectual respectability of theism. Cosmological arguments are argument is understood as an based upon the notion of causation. Now, theorizing about causation argument for the existence of a is perhaps as old as philosophy itself. More specifically, arguments for first cause that reasons from there being (caused or contingent) the existence of a first cause have a long and rich history.2 Ever since objects. The Kalam argument and Plato philosophers developed first cause arguments. Some well-known the fine-tuning argument are not examples from the philosophical tradition include Aristotle’s argument first cause arguments. First, they reason respectively from the claim in Physics and Metaphysics for the existence of a first unmoved mover, that the universe began a finite the second of the ‘Five Ways’ of Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologiæ time ago or that the cosmological and Leibniz’s argument for the existence of a necessary being that constants are fine-tuned. Moreover, they only establish that accounts for the existence of the universe as a whole.3 the physical universe is caused and not that there is an origin of With the rise of positivism in the second part of the nineteenth everything (including possibly ‘non-physical’ objects). century and the decline of metaphysics that went with it, the interest 3 Leibniz presents his argument in first cause arguments faded away. However, the last decennia of the in The Monadology, in On the twentieth century witnessed a ‘resurgence of metaphysics’ (Craig and Ultimate Origin of Things, in The Theodicy and in The Principles of Moreland 2009).4 The recent huge revival of interest in cosmological Nature and of Grace, Based on arguments for the existence of a first cause (Alexander 2008) can Reason. See Craig (1980) for an particularly be understood against this background. Several new overview. 4 In the introduction to cosmological arguments have been developed recently, notably those by The Blackwell Companion to R. Koons (1997), R. Gale and A. Pruss (1999) and J. Rasmussen (2010). Natural Theology W.L. Craig and J.P. Moreland write: ‘The collapse of positivism and its attendant Structure of this thesis verification principle of meaning was undoubtedly the most important philosophical event My thesis starts in chapter ii with a detailed assessment of two of the twentieth century. Their paradigmatic forms of traditional first cause arguments. I derive both demise heralded a resurgence of forms from respectively the Thomistic and Leibnizian cosmological metaphysics, along with other traditional problems of philosophy arguments. As I shall argue, there are cogent objections against both that verification had suppressed’ paradigmatic forms that cannot be resolved, and that render these forms (Craig and Moreland 2009). untenable as arguments for the existence of a first cause. In the next three chapters, i.e. chapter iii, iV and V, I provide a detailed assessment of the contemporary cosmological arguments of R. Koons, R. Gale and A. Pruss, and J. Rasmussen. As part of this assessment I identify and analyze a large range of objections to each of these arguments, both 10 Towards a renewed Case for Theism from the literature and proposed by myself. In chapter Vi I propose 5 Surely, the thesis of causalism my own new first cause argument by showing that atomism, i.e. the does not rule out there being objects that are caused and that assertion that each composite object is composed of simple objects, are the cause of one or more together with causalism, understood as the assertion that every object other objects. is a cause or has a cause,5 logically entail the existence of a first cause 6 This principle is already mentioned and accepted by if some additional general premises regarding the interrelationship Aristotle: ‘Everything has an between parthood, composition and causation are accepted as well. origin or is an origin’ (Physics Thus I show that a commitment to atomism, causalism and the 203b6). It is the negation of an earlier principle of existence as aforementioned additional premises result in a commitment to the introduced by Parmenides of Elea existence of a first cause. After that, in chapterV ii, I turn to a critical according to which something assessment of my new first cause argument by considering whether exists if and only if it is uncaused and not itself a cause.