From Aesthetic Virtues to God: Augmenting Theistic Personal Cause Arguments

I argue that the aesthetic theoretical virtues of beauty, simplicity, and unification, as well as the evidential virtue of explanatory depth, can transform theistic-friendly personal cause (PC) arguments—like the kalām cosmological argument (KCA) and the fine-tuning argument—into stand-alone argumen...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Theologica (Louvain-la-Neuve) 2023-01, Vol.7 (2)
1. Verfasser: Miksa, Rad
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 2
container_start_page
container_title Theologica (Louvain-la-Neuve)
container_volume 7
creator Miksa, Rad
description I argue that the aesthetic theoretical virtues of beauty, simplicity, and unification, as well as the evidential virtue of explanatory depth, can transform theistic-friendly personal cause (PC) arguments—like the kalām cosmological argument (KCA) and the fine-tuning argument—into stand-alone arguments for monotheism. The aesthetic virtues allow this by providing us with the grounds to rationally accept a perfect personal cause (i.e., God) as the best PC to believe in given the success of some PC argument. Using the KCA as an example, I argue that, once the KCA is accepted and a PC believed in, then a theory that posits a perfect PC as the cause of the universe is more beautiful, simpler, and has more unification and explanatory depth than the imperfect PC normally posited by the KCA’s standard conceptual analysis. And the same would hold true for any imperfect PC. Thus, once a PC argument has been accepted, the perfect PC theory is preferable to hold over any other PC theory. Finally, I address various objections to this reasoning.  
doi_str_mv 10.14428/thl.v7i2.64083
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>crossref</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_14428_thl_v7i2_64083</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>10_14428_thl_v7i2_64083</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-crossref_primary_10_14428_thl_v7i2_640833</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpjYBA3NNAzNDExstAvycjRKzPPNNIzMzGwMGZi4DQytTTWNTAyM2VBYnMw8BYXZxkYGBhZGBoamxlwMsi6FeXnKjimFpdkpJZkJiuEZRaVlKYWK5TkK7jnp_AwsKYl5hSn8kJpbgZ9N9cQZw_d5KL84uKi1LT4gqLM3MSiynhDg3iwQ-KBDokHOSQe7BBj0nUAAJXfOxY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>From Aesthetic Virtues to God: Augmenting Theistic Personal Cause Arguments</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Miksa, Rad</creator><creatorcontrib>Miksa, Rad</creatorcontrib><description>I argue that the aesthetic theoretical virtues of beauty, simplicity, and unification, as well as the evidential virtue of explanatory depth, can transform theistic-friendly personal cause (PC) arguments—like the kalām cosmological argument (KCA) and the fine-tuning argument—into stand-alone arguments for monotheism. The aesthetic virtues allow this by providing us with the grounds to rationally accept a perfect personal cause (i.e., God) as the best PC to believe in given the success of some PC argument. Using the KCA as an example, I argue that, once the KCA is accepted and a PC believed in, then a theory that posits a perfect PC as the cause of the universe is more beautiful, simpler, and has more unification and explanatory depth than the imperfect PC normally posited by the KCA’s standard conceptual analysis. And the same would hold true for any imperfect PC. Thus, once a PC argument has been accepted, the perfect PC theory is preferable to hold over any other PC theory. Finally, I address various objections to this reasoning.  </description><identifier>ISSN: 2593-0265</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2593-0265</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.14428/thl.v7i2.64083</identifier><language>eng</language><ispartof>Theologica (Louvain-la-Neuve), 2023-01, Vol.7 (2)</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,864,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Miksa, Rad</creatorcontrib><title>From Aesthetic Virtues to God: Augmenting Theistic Personal Cause Arguments</title><title>Theologica (Louvain-la-Neuve)</title><description>I argue that the aesthetic theoretical virtues of beauty, simplicity, and unification, as well as the evidential virtue of explanatory depth, can transform theistic-friendly personal cause (PC) arguments—like the kalām cosmological argument (KCA) and the fine-tuning argument—into stand-alone arguments for monotheism. The aesthetic virtues allow this by providing us with the grounds to rationally accept a perfect personal cause (i.e., God) as the best PC to believe in given the success of some PC argument. Using the KCA as an example, I argue that, once the KCA is accepted and a PC believed in, then a theory that posits a perfect PC as the cause of the universe is more beautiful, simpler, and has more unification and explanatory depth than the imperfect PC normally posited by the KCA’s standard conceptual analysis. And the same would hold true for any imperfect PC. Thus, once a PC argument has been accepted, the perfect PC theory is preferable to hold over any other PC theory. Finally, I address various objections to this reasoning.  </description><issn>2593-0265</issn><issn>2593-0265</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpjYBA3NNAzNDExstAvycjRKzPPNNIzMzGwMGZi4DQytTTWNTAyM2VBYnMw8BYXZxkYGBhZGBoamxlwMsi6FeXnKjimFpdkpJZkJiuEZRaVlKYWK5TkK7jnp_AwsKYl5hSn8kJpbgZ9N9cQZw_d5KL84uKi1LT4gqLM3MSiynhDg3iwQ-KBDokHOSQe7BBj0nUAAJXfOxY</recordid><startdate>20230129</startdate><enddate>20230129</enddate><creator>Miksa, Rad</creator><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20230129</creationdate><title>From Aesthetic Virtues to God</title><author>Miksa, Rad</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-crossref_primary_10_14428_thl_v7i2_640833</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Miksa, Rad</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Theologica (Louvain-la-Neuve)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Miksa, Rad</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>From Aesthetic Virtues to God: Augmenting Theistic Personal Cause Arguments</atitle><jtitle>Theologica (Louvain-la-Neuve)</jtitle><date>2023-01-29</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>7</volume><issue>2</issue><issn>2593-0265</issn><eissn>2593-0265</eissn><abstract>I argue that the aesthetic theoretical virtues of beauty, simplicity, and unification, as well as the evidential virtue of explanatory depth, can transform theistic-friendly personal cause (PC) arguments—like the kalām cosmological argument (KCA) and the fine-tuning argument—into stand-alone arguments for monotheism. The aesthetic virtues allow this by providing us with the grounds to rationally accept a perfect personal cause (i.e., God) as the best PC to believe in given the success of some PC argument. Using the KCA as an example, I argue that, once the KCA is accepted and a PC believed in, then a theory that posits a perfect PC as the cause of the universe is more beautiful, simpler, and has more unification and explanatory depth than the imperfect PC normally posited by the KCA’s standard conceptual analysis. And the same would hold true for any imperfect PC. Thus, once a PC argument has been accepted, the perfect PC theory is preferable to hold over any other PC theory. Finally, I address various objections to this reasoning.  </abstract><doi>10.14428/thl.v7i2.64083</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2593-0265
ispartof Theologica (Louvain-la-Neuve), 2023-01, Vol.7 (2)
issn 2593-0265
2593-0265
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_14428_thl_v7i2_64083
source DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
title From Aesthetic Virtues to God: Augmenting Theistic Personal Cause Arguments
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T06%3A06%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-crossref&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=From%20Aesthetic%20Virtues%20to%20God:%20Augmenting%20Theistic%20Personal%20Cause%20Arguments&rft.jtitle=Theologica%20(Louvain-la-Neuve)&rft.au=Miksa,%20Rad&rft.date=2023-01-29&rft.volume=7&rft.issue=2&rft.issn=2593-0265&rft.eissn=2593-0265&rft_id=info:doi/10.14428/thl.v7i2.64083&rft_dat=%3Ccrossref%3E10_14428_thl_v7i2_64083%3C/crossref%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true