To understand the weakness in the philosophic theory of cosmological argument you have to understand what the argument even means. The Cosmological Argument attempts to prove that God exists by showing that there cannot be an infinite number of regressions of causes to things that exist (Slick, “The Cosmological Argument”). It states that there must be a final uncaused-cause of all things. This uncaused-cause is asserted to be God exist (Slick, “The Cosmological Argument”). The basic break down of the argument is first, things exist, second, it is possible for those things not to exist, third, whatever has the possibility of non-existence, yet exist, has been caused to exist, fourth, there cannot be an infinite number of causes to bring something in to existence, fifth, therefore, there must be an uncaused cause of all things, sixth, the uncaused cause must be God (Lawhead, 328). Basically everything comes back to God and he is the cause to why everything exists, which is a weakness. One of the weaknesses of the argument is that if all things need a cause to exist, then God Himself must also, by definition, need a cause to exist (Slick, “The Cosmological Argument”). How does God exist if he has no cause? The argument is based on everything needing a cause to exist, but the thing that gives everything a cause to exist has no cause why he exists. Everything
Lawhead, William F. The Philosophical Journey An Ineractive Approach. Fith ed. New York: McGraw Hill, 2011. Print "Philosophy." Enotes.com. Enotes.com, n.d. Web. 09 Dec. 2012. Slick, Matt. "The Cosmological Argument." |Strengths of Comoslogical Argument|Argument God's Existence. Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry, n.d. Web. 09 Dec. 2012.
comes down to God, but God himself just didn’t pop up one day according to this theory. God didn’t cause himself to exist so in this argument there is a huge flaw and confusion. Another weakness is not everyone believes in religion and god,...