The Kalam Argument

Hello people,

I have recently come across the Kalam argument for the creation of the universe by God and, quite frankly, I'm scared! I can't seem to argue against it! :eek:

Before coming across this argument, I was a happy little cynic, confident in the belief that God does not exist; but now, it has really got me to reassess my position.
It is frighteningly logical, and it makes a hell of a lot of sense. Can anyone offer arguments against it, so I can be a happy little cynic once more?

An outline of the Kalam Argument:

1. The Universe had a beginning. It cannot be infinite in the sense that time extends infinitely in the past and will continue for infinity in the future, and this can be proved by the following example: imagine a library with an infinite amount of books. In this library, books are either hardback or softback. They are distributed equally amongst the shelves, and since there must be an infinite number of both softback and hardback books, because there are an infinite number of books in the library, the number of hardback books would equal the number of softback books. However, if there is an infinite number of hardback books in the library, then the number of hardback books in the library must equal the total number of books in the library, including the softback ones! This is because:

Number of hardbacks (infinity) = total number of library books (infinity), i.e. infinity = infinity

From this, we can say that time cannot extend back to infinity, and therefore it had a beginning.

2. The Universe was caused Since the universe had a beginning, it had to be caused. Every event in history has a cause, thus the beginning of the universe has a cause. The Universe could not have caused itself, as it is logically impossible for an event to be its own cause.

3. The Cause of the Universe was God So now that we've established that the Universe has a cause, we can say that this cause was either a natural event or a supernatural one, i.e. God. Since natural laws could not have been in place before the Universe was caused, we can conclude that the Universe was not caused by a natural event. Thus, the Universe was created by God, a being outside of time that can set the universe into being, ex nihilo

Scary, isn't it? Your thoughts? :rolleyes:

And yes, I realise this thread is also posted on the religion section; my mistake, I thought I was in the philosphy section, sorry! :redface:

Reply 1

786

Well, being muslim, I was naturally brought up taught that there is only one God, Lord of the universe. However, having also grown up in a society in which any mention of religion or belief automatically signifies "backwardness" and a general atmosphere of farce, I have had the advantage of being able analyse both views with equal consideration.

There is no question, in my mind at least, that God exists. In fact what exists besides God is the question that provides difficulty in answering.

The argument that you have provided will not rock the foundations of even the mildest atheists. What do you find so convincing about it? All these arguments can be nullified by the question "who created God"? This question which inseminates in your brain, upon which there is no doubt, is a wisper from the devil.

Of course, if one traversed the path, all would become apparent, but the path is traversed by only a few, who thus realise the true unity of God and can then claim gloriously that "I am the truth".

Reply 2

Apollo

Sofa King

Hello people,

I have recently come across the Kalam argument for the creation of the universe by God and, quite frankly, I'm scared! I can't seem to argue against it! :eek:

Before coming across this argument, I was a happy little cynic, confident in the belief that God does not exist; but now, it has really got me to reassess my position.
It is frighteningly logical, and it makes a hell of a lot of sense. Can anyone offer arguments against it, so I can be a happy little cynic once more?

An outline of the Kalam Argument:

1. The Universe had a beginning. It cannot be infinite in the sense that time extends infinitely in the past and will continue for infinity in the future, and this can be proved by the following example: imagine a library with an infinite amount of books. In this library, books are either hardback or softback. They are distributed equally amongst the shelves, and since there must be an infinite number of both softback and hardback books, because there are an infinite number of books in the library, the number of hardback books would equal the number of softback books. However, if there is an infinite number of hardback books in the library, then the number of hardback books in the library must equal the total number of books in the library, including the softback ones! This is because:

Number of hardbacks (infinity) = total number of library books (infinity), i.e. infinity = infinity

From this, we can say that time cannot extend back to infinity, and therefore it had a beginning.

2. The Universe was caused Since the universe had a beginning, it had to be caused. Every event in history has a cause, thus the beginning of the universe has a cause. The Universe could not have caused itself, as it is logically impossible for an event to be its own cause.
3. The Cause of the Universe was God So now that we've established that the Universe has a cause, we can say that this cause was either a natural event or a supernatural one, i.e. God. Since natural laws could not have been in place before the Universe was caused, we can conclude that the Universe was not caused by a natural event. Thus, the Universe was created by God, a being outside of time that can set the universe into being, ex nihilo

Scary, isn't it? Your thoughts? :rolleyes:

And yes, I realise this thread is also posted on the religion section; my mistake, I thought I was in the philosphy section, sorry! :redface:

I'm probably being really stupid, but wasnt that the big bang?

Reply 3

material breach

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/t77733.html for the ripped to shreads version

Reply 4

Lawz-

786

All these arguments can be nullified by the question "who created God"? This question which inseminates in your brain, upon which there is no doubt, is a wisper from the devil.

No doubt? Hardly - typical religious outlook - a question that can't be answered, and the application of logic must somehow be related to evil and "the devil" - the perennial bogeyman.

Reply 5

Dyakson

Sofa King

Hello people,

I have recently come across the Kalam argument...

And yes, I realise this thread is also posted on the religion section; my mistake, I thought I was in the philosphy section, sorry! :redface:

Why is this appropiate for Philosophy but not Religion?

Hmm, there's less howlers in this forum, maybe someone will hear me here.

I'm Creationist and that argument makes no sense to me, and I would never use that in debate.

It uses dodgy maths that makes not much sense to anyone. It's logical like saying that:
2 x 0 = 0,
4 x 0 = 0,
4 x 0 = 2 x 0
4 = 2

The argument is based on adding and subtracting infinity. Which is illogical.

Reply 6

Jonatan

Sofa King

Hello people,

An outline of the Kalam Argument:

1. The Universe had a beginning. It cannot be infinite in the sense that time extends infinitely in the past and will continue for infinity in the future, and this can be proved by the following example: imagine a library with an infinite amount of books.

First error. The number of books in a library is a countable set whereas the number of instants of time is an uncountable set. They can therefore not be put in one to one correspondence (as there is no bijection between the two) hence the argument cannot be extrapolated to a set with teh same cardinality as the real numbers.

Sofa King

In this library, books are either hardback or softback. They are distributed equally amongst the shelves, and since there must be an infinite number of both softback and hardback books, because there are an infinite number of books in the library, the number of hardback books would equal the number of softback books.

Second error. There ar einfinitely many books in the library, hence "the number of books" is undefined as all natural numbers are finite in size.

Sofa King

However, if there is an infinite number of hardback books in the library, then the number of hardback books in the library must equal the total number of books in the library, including the softback ones! This is because:

This is perfectly true, but not a contradiction. Consider, as another example, the set of natural integers. The set of naturals { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5....} form a bijection with the set of even naturals {2, 4, 6, 8.....} namely the map f:N->N where f(n) = 2n. Thus the two set can be put in one to one correspondence with one another. Thus whereas finite sets must always have different cardinalities from its propper subsets this is not true for infinite sets.

Sofa King

2. The Universe was caused Since the universe had a beginning, it had to be caused. Every event in history has a cause, thus the beginning of the universe has a cause. The Universe could not have caused itself, as it is logically impossible for an event to be its own cause.

There are plenty of random events in nature, such as teh radioactive decay of atoms, or the thermondynamic vibrations of ceasium in its ground state. Furthermore, the idea that the universe must have a cause is based on laws of logic which are a feature of the universe and may thus not apply before the universe's creation. Hence the conclusion is invalid.

Sofa King

3. The Cause of the Universe was God So now that we've established that the Universe has a cause, we can say that this cause was either a natural event or a supernatural one, i.e. God. Since natural laws could not have been in place before the Universe was caused, we can conclude that the Universe was not caused by a natural event.

This argument contradicts itself as the logic used is itself a natural law. Deductive logic cannot be applied to an undefined situation as the premises are not well defined.

Sofa King

Thus, the Universe was created by God, a being outside of time that can set the universe into being, ex nihilo

Even if the above argument had proved that god was teh cause of the universe (which it does not due to the large number of flaws in it), it does not imply that god is a being. It stated that god was a cause. A cause and a being are two clearly distinct classes of objects and that "god" is a subset of one of them does not imply that god is a subset of the other.

Reply 7

john !!

^Well I conclude that argument has just been well and truly beaten.

Reply 8

4Ed

agreed. I do like Jonatan's post there...

I was going to knock over the argument myself when i first read the post, but Jonatan's counterproof is very complete, and with all the correct terminology, far better than anything I could have produced (i would have outlined a sketchy but wordy contradiction).

Reply 9

mussed

I believe Bertrand Russell was also fooled by this argument, until he asked Who Created God? If you hold Causality as the rule, then God too must have been caused. How about infinite cycles of universes, the multiverse idea, etc - science also has explanations for what there was pre the Big Bang.

Reply 10

Howard

Sofa King

Hello people,

I have recently come across the Kalam argument for the creation of the universe by God and, quite frankly, I'm scared! I can't seem to argue against it! :eek:

Well, call me "Mr.Thickie" if you will (and I'm sure you will) but I don't follow this line of reasoning at all. :confused:

Reply 11

john !!

Sofa King

1. The Universe had a beginning. It cannot be infinite in the sense that time extends infinitely in the past and will continue for infinity in the future, and this can be proved by the following example: imagine a library with an infinite amount of books. In this library, books are either hardback or softback. They are distributed equally amongst the shelves, and since there must be an infinite number of both softback and hardback books, because there are an infinite number of books in the library, the number of hardback books would equal the number of softback books.

However, if there is an infinite number of hardback books in the library, then the number of hardback books in the library must equal the total number of books in the library, including the softback ones! This is because:

Number of hardbacks (infinity) = total number of library books (infinity), i.e. infinity = infinity

From this, we can say that time cannot extend back to infinity, and therefore it had a beginning.