universe is finite. An infinite universe implies infinite number. But no number can be infinite, for to any number, however great, a unit can be added, which shows that it was not infinite before. Here again we see that the most approved forms of the Cosmological Argument are obliged to avail themselves of the intuition of the infinite, to supplement the logical process. Versus Martineau, Study, 1:416 ? ?Though we cannot directly infer the infinitude of God from a limited creation, indirectly we may exclude every other position by resort to its unlimited scene of existence (space). ?But this would equally warrant our belief in the infinitude of our fellow men. Or, it is the argument of Clarke and Gillespie (see Ontological Argument below). Schiller, Die Grosse der Welt, seems to hold to a boundless universe. He represents a tired spirit as seeking the last limit of creation. A second pilgrim meets him from the spaces beyond with the words: ?Steh! du segelst umsonst, ? vor dir Unendlichkeit? ? ?Hold! thou journeyest in vain, ? before thee is only Infinity.? On the law of parsimony, see Sir Win. Hamilton, Discussions, 628.
2. The Value of the Cosmological Argument, then, is simply this, ? it proves the existence of some cause of the universe indefinitely great. When we go beyond this and ask whether this cause is a cause of being, or merely a cause of change, to the universe; whether it is a cause apart from the universe, or one with it; whether it is an eternal cause, or a cause dependent upon some other cause; whether it is intelligent or unintelligent, infinite or finite, one or many, ? this argument cannot assure us.
On the whole argument, see Flint, Theism, 93-130; Mozley, Essays, Hist, and Theol., 2:414-444; Hedge, Ways of the Spirit 148-154; Studien und Kritiken, 1876:9-31.
II. THE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT, OR ARGUMENT FROM ORDER AND USEFUL COLLOCATION IN NATURE.
This is not properly an argument from design to a designer; for that design implies a designer is simply an identical proposition. It may be more correctly stated as follows: Order and useful collocation pervading a system respectively imply intelligence and purpose as the cause of that order and collocation. Since order and useful collocation pervade the universe, there must exist an intelligence adequate to the production of this order, and a will adequate to direct this collocation to useful ends.
Etymologically, ?teleological argument? = argument to ends or final causes, that is, ?causes which, beginning as a thought, work themselves
Was this article helpful?