Contingency Argument for Theism
Summary
In Aspiring Robloxians of Knowledge (ARK) this thread presents the contingency argument for theism, asking why there is something rather than nothing. It contrasts contingency with chance, cites fine tuning and dependent laws of the universe, and argues for a necessary being that grounds existence without committing to a specific religious definition. This sparks philosophical debate for the community.
A
I haven’t studied religion too much so I may not know many arguments in favor of theism. However, id say it’s the contingency argument.
Why is there something rather than nothing? Things could have not existed (contingent), yet they exist. We can apply this to various things like ourselves and burgers. What I’m saying is that we exist but our existence isn’t necessary. If everything’s existence wasn’t necessary then we wouldn’t exist. This points to a necessary being, it exists because its existence is autonomous and independent. Contingent things cannot account for their own existence.
You may argue “why can’t the universe itself be necessary?” Well, the laws could be different, matter could fail to exist, and stars could not form. It shows dependency in its laws and structure, I’ll list a few examples. The universe required very specific constants, tiny changes would destroy the universe (contingency.) Also, if matter was distributed differently many things wouldn’t stabilize and the universe as we know it might not exist. This is supposed to point to a higher being that is not contingent, but not necessarily the usual theistic god used in religion. However god has many definitions, so it could point to a theistic god and it could also just point to a concept superseding reality.
Chance is about how something randomly comes about, and contingency is about whether something must exist. Contingency is about whether something could or could not exist. It’s not about randomness it’s about dependence within a system. The main thing we are trying to decipher is dependence in our universe, it’s not chance. We are labeling this as contingent because they don’t need to exist for us to exist.
We’re trying to figure out why something happens, and chance can’t explain it all. Even if you say the universe was created by chance there has to be possible outcomes within in a framework. Chance explains the outcomes but not why existence happens, hence a need for a being that is necessary. And if I were to define a necessary being it is something that exists independently, it doesn’t need a cause, condition, or a system to exist. Contingent beings fail to exist independently and rely on something else to bring them to existence.
Do u guys like my pfp
BRO
You typed your thing at like 1am for me
Just respond later in the day
That’s what I did
Eh fair
Alexander are you religious
Nope
You aren’t
He is a gnostic athiest
Yeah I read
I am probably agnostic theist
Religion 🙃
Scroll up
