Final Philosophy Paper
I will oppose Bertrand Russell’s view that believing in God is trivial and that of humans poor imagination. I will use Tim Holt’s “Philosophy of Religion” to show how believing in God is more logical than not. Russell uses a few arguments to try an disprove the existence of God in “Why I am not a Christian.” I will address the “First Cause Argument,” the “Design Theory Argument,” and the “Morality Argument.” I will touch briefly on what Russell believes and then use common and widely accepted theories to refute Russell.
Russell uses many reasons to support his disbelief of God and refutes many known theories explaining God but I will focus on his main points. First of which being, “The First-Cause Argument,” which basically means everything we know has a cause and no matter how far back existence is traced, there is chain events of causes leading back to one cause. Russell rebuked this argument by quoting an autobiography by John Stuart Mills,"My father taught me that the question 'Who made me?' cannot be answered, since it immediately suggests the further question `Who made god?” That sentence for Russell confirms that God mustn’t exist, he also says our poor imagination created the idea of God (Russell Why I am not a Christian). Russell fails to logically disprove Gods existence because he did not adequately cast doubt upon the many other arguments that have a clearer, more philosophical standpoint. The Cosmological Argument simply states: (1) Everything that exists has a cause of its existence. (2) The universe exists. Therefore: (3) The universe has a cause of its existence. (4) If the universe has a cause of its existence, then that cause is God. Therefore: (5) God exists.
It does not seem logical or ideal to use an authors autobiography to try and disprove a widely accepted theory. Any person can take a set of ideas and say, “this is...