Conatus: REVISED EDITION by Tom Wallace - HTML preview

C O N A T U S

intricacy of the universe and goes on to say that such a universe could not have arisen by mere chance — there must be some kind of mind that has designed it. The problem with the argument is that it inevitably leads to the simple but obvious question, who made God? Theologians have countered this by saying that since God is eternal this question has no meaning, but this answer really doesn't get out of the difficulty.

The cosmological argument is the argument from a first cause. Events in the universe — so the argument goes — are related by cause and effect. Thus, it is argued, there must have been a ‘first cause’ to set the whole thing going at the beginning of time. Again, like the teleological argument, the question arises, what caused God? (With the response, God is eternal so needs no cause.) Also it could be argued that the universe itself is eternal, just as God is said to be, and therefore, by the same token, it requires no cause.

Recent theories about the ‘origin’ of the universe have also suggested that time, whilst finite, may ‘fold back on itself’ in much the same way as finite but unbounded physical space is supposed to do. This does away with the need for a first cause, without necessitating an eternal universe. The universe, on this view, is in effect self-caused.

The epistemological argument for the existence of God is concerned with the apparent purposefulness in the universe. It is argued that it is clear, particularly from evolution, that there is some kind of purpose being fulfilled in the universe — or at least in our corner of it. This

143