Why the big Bang singularity does not help the Kal M cosmological argument for theism

British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59 (4):675-708 (2008)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The cosmic singularity provides negligible evidence for creation in the finite past, and hence theism. A physical theory might have no metric or multiple metrics, so a ‘beginning’ must involve a first moment, not just finite age. Whether one dismisses singularities or takes them seriously, physics licenses no first moment. The analogy between the Big Bang and stellar gravitational collapse indicates that a Creator is required in the first case only if a Destroyer is needed in the second. The need for and progress in quantum gravity and the underdetermination of theories by data make it difficult to take singularities seriously. The singularity exemplifies the sort of gap that is likely to be closed by scientific progress, obviating special divine action. The apparent irrelevance of cardinality to practices of counting infinite sets in classical field theory and Fourier analysis is noted. Introduction The Doctrine of Creation and Its Warrant Cardinality and Sizes of Infinity Modern Cosmology and Creation Tolerance or Intolerance toward Singularities? Leibniz against Incompetent Watchmaker? Induction from Earlier Theories' Breakdown? Stellar Collapse Implies Theistic Destroyer Stacking the Deck for GTR Quantum Gravity Tends to Resolve Singularities Vicious God-of-the-Gaps Character Fluctuating or Inaccessible Warrant Big Bang Cosmology Not Especially Congenial to Faith CiteULike     Connotea     Del.icio.us     What's this?

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,813

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Theism and physical cosmology.Hans Halvorson - 2010 - In Charles Taliaferro, Victoria Harrison & Stewart Goetz (eds.), Routledge Companion to Theism.
Simplicity and Why the Universe Exists.Quentin Smith - 1997 - Philosophy 72 (279):125 - 132.
Theism, atheism, and big bang cosmology.William Lane Craig & Quentin Smith - 1993 - New York: Oxford University Press. Edited by Quentin Smith.
The uncaused beginning of the universe.Quentin Smith - 1988 - Philosophy of Science 55 (1):39-57.
Should We Believe in the Big Bang?: A Critique of the Integrity of Modern Cosmology.Graeme Rhook & Mark Zangari - 1994 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:228 - 237.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
187 (#108,204)

6 months
43 (#96,460)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

J. Brian Pitts
University of Lincoln

Citations of this work

On under-determination in cosmology.Jeremy Butterfield - 2014 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 46 (1):57-69.
Underdetermination in Cosmology: an Invitation.Jeremy Butterfield - 2012 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 86 (1):1-18.
Cosmology and Theology.Hans Halvorson & Helge Kragh - 2011 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

View all 13 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Laws and symmetry.Bas C. Van Fraassen - 1989 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Warranted Christian Belief.Alvin Plantinga - 2000 - New York, US: Oxford University Press USA.
The Design Argument.Elliott Sober - 2019 - Cambridge University Press.

View all 53 references / Add more references