Britannica
Sources used in this answer
Why do critics say that the universe may not need the explanation proposed by the cosmological argument?
Created from Britannica articles
using AI.
AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles.
Philosophy of religion
Detail of Religion, mural in lunette from the Family and Education series by Charles Sprague Pearce, 1897; in the Library of Congress, Thomas Jefferson Building, Washington, D.C.
Critics of the cosmological argument argue that the universe may not require an external explanation for several reasons:
- Eternal Existence: Critics suggest that the universe may not have had a beginning. If the universe has existed throughout time, it could be considered a necessary being itself, existing eternally without dependence on an external cause.1
- The Universe as a Brute Fact: Philosophers argue that the universe might simply be the ultimate "given" or a brute fact. In this view, the search for an external ground of intelligibility is not logically compelled; one may reasonably accept that the universe is finally unintelligible rather than assuming it must have been created by a self-existent personal will.1
- Attribution of Order: Drawing on the ideas of Strato of Lampsacus, critics contend that any order observed in the world should be attributed to the universe itself rather than to a postulated outside cause.2
Ultimately, critics maintain that the cosmological argument does not force a choice between a created universe and an unintelligible one, as the latter remains a logically possible conclusion.1