Hume, Russell and Assessing the Cosmological Argument

Overview

Recall questions on Hume's attack on a necessary being and the fallacy of composition, Russell's rejection of sufficient reason and his mother analogy, and the argument's strengths, weaknesses and value for faith.

What you need to know

Answer each one before you reveal it.

Questions from this subtopic

Each one with the model answer underneath.

1. 1

   How does Hume challenge the coherence of the concept of a necessary being?

   Model answer

   He argues that whatever we can conceive as existing, we can also conceive as not existing, so the concept of a being that cannot not exist is incoherent.

2. 2

   What logical fallacy does Hume accuse the cosmological argument of committing?

   Model answer

   The fallacy of composition.

3. 3

   Explain how the fallacy of composition undermines the cosmological argument according to Hume.

   Model answer

   Explaining each part of a series does not require explaining the whole series; the argument wrongly moves from parts needing explanation to the whole needing explanation.

4. 4

   What alternative explanation does Hume offer instead of God as the necessary being?

   Model answer

   The universe itself might be the necessary being, removing the need for God as an explanation.

5. 5

   What is Russell's main criticism of the cosmological argument?

   Model answer

   The universe is simply a brute fact that requires no explanation.

6. 6

   Which philosophical principle does Russell reject in his criticism of the cosmological argument?

   Model answer

   The principle of sufficient reason.

Other ways to work this

The same content, four other ways.

What is inside Levo

Six ways to work the same material.